Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
Do we have a thread for this movie and I'm just missing it? (Will lock this one if so!)
I went into it with low expectations but really, really enjoyed it! The acting was great, and while the plot was rather standard that more than made up for it, imo. And while I never played the games, the main character was the first believable presentation of Lara Croft that I'd seen.
Overall, it gets a solid A from me, I'm really surprised at the Rotten Tomatoes score - especially when disappointments like Guardians of the Galaxy 2 get rated so high.
I'm planning to see it at some point soon, need to see Black Panther first but it's on the list and I'm very much looking forward to it. Most of the 'complaints' raised by various reviews are the things I wanted to see in there anyway.
I think the low review scores are coming from people who didn't really pay attention to where the franchise has been going the last few years. Since the 2013 reboot, the tone has become more serious, more subtle and focused more on Lara as a character than it has on over-the-top explodey stuff (though there's still plenty of that). I imagine a lot of the reviewers are unaware of this, and were expecting something in the vein of the earlier games or the original movies, a cheesy, ludicrous one-dimensional action B-movie rather than something that takes itself at least semi-seriously.
Case in point, the BBC's 2-star review complained that it felt like a prequel, despite it being based on a game that is literally and explicitly a prequel to any other entry in the franchise, charting (as the movie does) Lara's first real Tomb Raiding escapade. Other reviews mentioned that it was too much like that 2013 game, which is a bit rich when the same reviewers claimed that stuff like Assassin's Creed and Warcraft didn't draw heavily enough on their source material. From what I've read, this sounds like the first video game adaptation that both takes itself and its source material seriously and is actually a well-made movie, so I have high hopes. With any luck, it'll do well enough to convince a few more filmmakers and studios to try this type of adaptation.
By all accounts, this movie is a beat-for-beat retelling of the 2013 game, but I love that game so you'll hear no complaints from me if it is!
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2018/03/17 22:24:49
I think the cast taking it seriously was a big deal to. I want to see it. It looks good and the main character looks the part and is a heck of an actress. That and the work she put in so she could look the part and do her own stunts is pretty great.
Best Painted (2015 Adepticon 40k Champs)
They Shall Know Fear - Adepticon 40k TT Champion (2012 & 2013) & 40k TT Best Sport (2014), 40k TT Best Tactician (2015 & 2016)
But I don't a realistic or relatable Lara, she was way more fun as a self-centred amoral psychopathic thief and animal murderer par excellence from the first few PS1 games,...
"AND YET YOU ACT AS IF THERE IS SOME IDEAL ORDER IN THE WORLD, AS IF THERE IS SOME...SOME RIGHTNESS IN THE UNIVERSE BY WHICH IT MAY BE JUDGED."
Paradigm wrote: I'm planning to see it at some point soon, need to see Black Panther first but it's on the list and I'm very much looking forward to it. Most of the 'complaints' raised by various reviews are the things I wanted to see in there anyway.
I think the low review scores are coming from people who didn't really pay attention to where the franchise has been going the last few years. Since the 2013 reboot, the tone has become more serious, more subtle and focused more on Lara as a character than it has on over-the-top explodey stuff (though there's still plenty of that). I imagine a lot of the reviewers are unaware of this, and were expecting something in the vein of the earlier games or the original movies, a cheesy, ludicrous one-dimensional action B-movie rather than something that takes itself at least semi-seriously.
Case in point, the BBC's 2-star review complained that it felt like a prequel, despite it being based on a game that is literally and explicitly a prequel to any other entry in the franchise, charting (as the movie does) Lara's first real Tomb Raiding escapade. Other reviews mentioned that it was too much like that 2013 game, which is a bit rich when the same reviewers claimed that stuff like Assassin's Creed and Warcraft didn't draw heavily enough on their source material. From what I've read, this sounds like the first video game adaptation that both takes itself and its source material seriously and is actually a well-made movie, so I have high hopes. With any luck, it'll do well enough to convince a few more filmmakers and studios to try this type of adaptation.
By all accounts, this movie is a beat-for-beat retelling of the 2013 game, but I love that game so you'll hear no complaints from me if it is!
You'd think so, but I've seen reviews from the "serious Lara is good" side of things that gak on the film as well, though their angle seems to be either "Lara isn't enough of a character in her own right" and/or "caring about/showing concern for her father robs Lara of all agency something something misogyny".
TBH I read the Guardian review in a moment of utter boredom and it just reinforced how utterly alienated critics are from the general viewing public, because when they say "it's like Indiana Jones" that sounds like a good thing to me, but they seem to see it as some hideous black mark against the film. I'll give it a go when it gets a digital release, and expect I'll probably enjoy it.
"Your society's broken, so who should we blame? Should we blame the rich, powerful people who caused it? No, lets blame the people with no power and no money and those immigrants who don't even have the vote. Yea, it must be their fething fault." - Iain M Banks
-----
"The language of modern British politics is meant to sound benign. But words do not mean what they seem to mean. 'Reform' actually means 'cut' or 'end'. 'Flexibility' really means 'exploit'. 'Prudence' really means 'don't invest'. And 'efficient'? That means whatever you want it to mean, usually 'cut'. All really mean 'keep wages low for the masses, taxes low for the rich, profits high for the corporations, and accept the decline in public services and amenities this will cause'." - Robin McAlpine from Common Weal
Yodhrin wrote: TBH I read the Guardian review in a moment of utter boredom and it just reinforced how utterly alienated critics are from the general viewing public, because when they say "it's like Indiana Jones" that sounds like a good thing to me, but they seem to see it as some hideous black mark against the film. I'll give it a go when it gets a digital release, and expect I'll probably enjoy it.
I actually thought that in the theater, and felt the same way! Indiana Jones is totally awesome, after all and I thought her character developed in a very believable way.
Let me know what you guys think after seeing it
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/03/18 04:05:37
I'm going to watch it on monday or tuesday. I'm not a fan of the videogame, I've only played tomb raider 2 when I was a kid and never liked it. The movies with Angelina Jolie were definitely mediocre overall, and I never liked Angelina anyway, but they're that kind of film that I can enjoy watching when I want something easy.
The real reason I'm very interested in this reboot is Alicia Vikander: she's one of my favorite actresses, I absolutely love her and her only presence in the movie usually worths the price of the ticket. After all I managed to see Assassin's Creed (never played the games, and know the franchise only because there's a part set in my hometown, Forlì, in one episode), which was very bad but IMHO saved by the protagonists, who are amazing actors.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/03/18 09:58:24
I watched it today. It was fine. Not by any stretch ground breaking or amazing, but pretty entertaining. They managed to reduce the core experience of the first tomb raider reboot game into it's runtime with some changes to the plot and side characters so that it actually fit.
Better then probably any other video game movie (not a high bar). I have 2 complaints.
Spoiler:
1) they open the movie with a monologue that is her dads research on the Japanese Empress/queen, which is then repeated almost word for word not too much later in the movie when she finds his tape recorder. Use one or the other. We don't need both to understand whats happening.
2) the last line of the movie is the really cheesy "Il take two" line from the trailers. The rest of the movie wasn't that cheesy. It doesn't fit. Leave it out.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/03/19 07:23:43
These are my opinions. This is how I feel. Others may feel differently. This needs to be stated for some reason.
Watched it last Thursday on the first day of the cinematic run here in Germany together with my wife.
She did enjoy it much more than me... I found it rather bland and most likely forgetable. I wasn't really convinced about the casting choice for Alicia Vikander.
One of my main pet peeve was that even though she encounters quite a lot of falls and drops she had way to few bruises and cuts and no/not enough restriction in her mobility... Destroyed my believe in the setting...
Well. Was okayish for a popcorn movie. Nothing more... nothing less.
So, is this more a return to the character she was before the reboot (adventure ahoy!), or is this a full blown "Lara Voorhees is coming to get you, mook!" treatment (slasher movie psycho killer with PTSD) as of the most recent reboot of the franchise?
Kilkrazy wrote: Tomb Raider 1 was a hit because it was a really good game.
Oh yea, don't get me wrong I think the same. But I do remember boys at school talking about it extensively because it had a buxom lady as a main character... that's certainly why I tried it to begin with!
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/03/19 13:06:09
I'd like to see it but as usual will have to wait for cable probably. I like the 2 newer tomb raider games a lot, I prefer the more realistic Lara I guess. I didn't really care for the Angelina Jolie movies, they were just OK.. so I'm hopeful this one will be better.
Jolie's movie was a good representation of what the Tomb Raider game/franchise was 'back then', while the new movie is (probably) a better representation of what that all is now.
I haven't seen the movie, but I really enjoyed the 2 games in the rebooted TR series.
I just saw Tomb Raider and thoroughly enjoyed it. It was a perfectly fine take on a 'serious' Indiana Jones or National Treasure style adventure film.
It even had a few twists along the way that I didn't see coming.
I think the best touchstone for it is. The Angelina Jolie Tomb Raiders are Moonraker Bond, the Alicia Vikander Tomb Raider is Skyfall Bond.
Sure, people can like the Moore films, people can like the Craig films but they're not truly comparable to each other aside from some surface elements.
All these 1/5 or 2/5 critic reviews just seem sheer rubbish, and I've got my own theories on that...
"Your society's broken, so who should we blame? Should we blame the rich, powerful people who caused it? No, lets blame the people with no power and no money and those immigrants who don't even have the vote. Yea, it must be their fething fault." - Iain M Banks
-----
"The language of modern British politics is meant to sound benign. But words do not mean what they seem to mean. 'Reform' actually means 'cut' or 'end'. 'Flexibility' really means 'exploit'. 'Prudence' really means 'don't invest'. And 'efficient'? That means whatever you want it to mean, usually 'cut'. All really mean 'keep wages low for the masses, taxes low for the rich, profits high for the corporations, and accept the decline in public services and amenities this will cause'." - Robin McAlpine from Common Weal
Compel wrote: I just saw Tomb Raider and thoroughly enjoyed it. It was a perfectly fine take on a 'serious' Indiana Jones or National Treasure style adventure film.
It even had a few twists along the way that I didn't see coming.
I think the best touchstone for it is. The Angelina Jolie Tomb Raiders are Moonraker Bond, the Alicia Vikander Tomb Raider is Skyfall Bond.
Sure, people can like the Moore films, people can like the Craig films but they're not truly comparable to each other aside from some surface elements.
All these 1/5 or 2/5 critic reviews just seem sheer rubbish, and I've got my own theories on that...
Watched it yesterday, as expected it was fine but nothing sensational.
Alicia Vikander was perfect in a role that is not her tipycal one. Much better than Angelina Jolie, who was the real miscast and the two raspberry nominations proved that.
Me and my partner saw it the other day. We both really enjoyed the reboot games and were pretty disappointed with the film.
The whole section of the film before her going to find Yamatai was a waste of time with characters who had no actual bearing on the plot. It was pure padding. This then meant that they didn't have the time to do as many cool, fun things on the island itself.
Spoiler:
The changes to the plot from the game to film also seemed unnecessary and also weakened the film, in my opinion. Turning Himiko from a sun goddess with the power to control the weather into some death queen was pointless and also handicapped the plot. Her control of the weather gives a reason for the terrible storms around the island and for why you can't leave. This means that Lara has an actual reason for finding her.
Her father should not have been in the film. Having him already have found the island and done the research removed character from Lara herself. In the game the search for Yamatai was based on Lara's research, not her fathers. In the film we don't see any of her skills such as cartography. The only thing she can do is solve puzzle boxes.
Also, I think introducing Trinity immediately is a mistake. It made the villain bland (Cult leader trying to resurrect sun goddess as he's gone mad after being stranded for years vs guy who shoots people and otherwise doesn't care about what he's looking for). The heavy handedness of the foreshadowing of Ana and seeming removal of her relationship with Lord Croft also removes a twist from any sequel especially if they use Konstantin (though hopefully they don't ruin him like Mathias).
Why did they remove the supernatural elements of the story? It has been a huge part of Tomb Raider since the beginning, not to mention its influences like Indiana Jones and other pulp 30s-esque adventure stories. Where was the body transferring sun goddess? The army of Oni samurai?
And where were the epic set pieces such as the climb up to the radio antenna and subsequent plane crash? The escape through the burning pagoda? Lara climbing up to the ritual chamber through a blizzard as the walls collapse around her? Not to mention one of my favourites where Lara is wading through a river of blood as the aforementioned Oni are slaughtering the Himiko cult soldiers looking for you, you hear their screams, the clinking footsteps of the Oni as they stalk above you, it was a great, really tense part of the game.
So much wasted potential, in my opinion.
In short, they were given a game perfectly fitted to being a film (because it was written like one in the first place) and they gutted it of its characters (where was Roth? Or Sam? Or Jonah?), its setting (no old japanese military installations? No old japanese villages or architecture?) and its supernatural hooks (which weakens Lara's journey and also that of Trinity, basically making them more like Umbrella Corp than the religious nuts they are meant to be).
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Paradigm wrote: By all accounts, this movie is a beat-for-beat retelling of the 2013 game, but I love that game so you'll hear no complaints from me if it is!
Sadly this is very far from the truth. About the only things in common are some names (Lara, Mathias, Yamatai, Himiko) and that Lara has to cross a waterfall through the rusted hull of an old WW2 bomber. I say only the names are in common because the things they're attached to are changed beyond recognition, with the exception of Lara herself who is, despite lacking much of the character from the games, actually recognisable.
This message was edited 6 times. Last update was at 2018/03/25 10:55:33
The Laws of Thermodynamics:
1) You cannot win. 2) You cannot break even. 3) You cannot stop playing the game.
Colonel Flagg wrote:You think you're real smart. But you're not smart; you're dumb. Very dumb. But you've met your match in me.
I think the casting is the only redeeming value here. The performances are strong and way better than the ruined plot deserved. Maybe I’m just bitter cause I liked the game but they took out all the things that I liked about it and replaced it with something infinitely more cliche. The ending reveal was imo particularly bad. If not for the solid acting and high production values this is the kind of movie I with SyFy original slapped on the screen.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/03/24 22:52:08
I recently saw the Jolie Tomb Raider.... I had not seen it. I was really surprised to see Daniel Craig was in it. He either did a very wierd voice ro was dubbed. I honestly do not know.
Other than that, how did this ever get a sequel! Man, was it trying WAY too hard to be cool. In the end, it failed at being cool... pretty badly.
The new one you say? Never heard of it.
Support Blood and Spectacles Publishing:
https://www.patreon.com/Bloodandspectaclespublishing
