F U SERENITY ONLY CAME OUT 16 YEARS AGO OR SOMRTHING I WAS GOING TO WATCH THAT!

But I'm glad I read your review. I think we think the same things about the game and it will be worth checking out.

I don't really care when video game movies ruin video games personally, but I do care when they're bad and try too hard to be video gamey. Then it's embarrassing. I'm glad this one appears to have just movie fied the game story with a few missteps.

Dude, it’s totally true about her always being saved and her crying:

Ren saves her from the punk kids.
Ren gets her out of the chain gang.
Her Dad saves her from bad guy what’s his name by making an explosion.
Ren digs her out of the tomb.

She kills the dude for the first time and starts crying about it.
She cries when she can’t shoot her dad (understandable)
She cries when bad guy has her beat in the tomb.

Anyway I’m surprised you didn’t mention the character motivations being totally wack. Like, Laura has no training or real interest in archeology, and is just dicking around at the start of the film. If she’s the type of person who’d be willing to risk it all to find her dad, you certainly don’t get that impression. The movie needed to start with her as a teenager, on expeditions with her father. That way we can see their relationship rather than be told about it in flashbacks. Dad goes off and leaves her. Now we go to present day where she’s found a lead to his wearabouts, and sets off to find him. The lead turns out bad, and it’s a dead end. She spent tons of money to get there and is now broke. NOW the film starts. Wouldn’t you buy that more?

Also, the bad guy was bad. Why didn’t he have a connection to them both? Why was he not the father’s prodige who screws him over to get a find? I was wondering why he was so keen on finding this tomb. It would make more sense if he had some kind of established hostility with the father. Maybe he screws the Dad over in the scene I mentioned above to give Laura a reason to hate him too.

That was a pretty good review. I obviously haven't seen it, but yeah. Good stuff! But I'd wait to see it until it's on TV probably.

I also can't believe you still spent the money to see this. Please tell me it was someone else's money in the form of a gift card. Or you pirated it. Or snuck in. Or something. I mean, look:

https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/tomb_raider_2018

Surely you had to have known going in that you didn't need to see it so that the rest of us didn't have to. Cody was enough for me, but that link says a lot. So did plenty of video game sites. You could have put that money toward Infinity War tickets. Or seen The Shape of Water. :(

And she absolutely loved it.

This movie is not going to win any awards for acting or writing, but combine it with dinner afterwards and it makes for a fun father-daughter date night.

It was sort of a spur-of-the-moment decision I made late Saturday night, so I just went by myself. I enjoyed it and thought it was a decent action film that respected its source material (source material which, as some of my other posts here have mentioned, I am very emotionally attached to).

The only thing I had any REAL problem with was the few corny action-movie quips they threw in. There were, thankfully, only a couple of them.

I generally dislike analyzing films much beyond either enjoying them or not, but I had some thoughts/responses:

I just got back from seeing Tomb Raider (2018) and… I think I probably saw it so you don’t have to.

Ok, what do I mean by that? Is Tomb Raider a typical “they should never have made this” video game movie? No. Not even close. As a live action rendition of the 2013 video game, it was somewhere between “ok” and “all right.” It had several missteps, but ultimately, while it wasn’t something like “the video game movie that puts video game movies on the map” or whatever, it did give the Tomb Raider (2013) era property due respect and, unlike so many other movies based on established games or beloved animated series, it pretty much completely avoided embarrassing its source material.

I agree with all of that, except for the headline. I don't think it's a movie people should stay away from, though it might not be everyone's favorite thing.

[*]It correctly and faithfully portrayed Lara Croft as an smart, independent, tough (but not invincible) character.

Sure, Lara gets beat a couple times in the movie. First, early on in the boxing ring to show that she is tough and scrappy but also small and able to be overwhelmed by a larger opponent. And near the end by the main bad guy who she fights pretty well against but who is just bigger than she is. But, in both of these fights, Lara gets in some good hits and in both of them she comes very close to winning.

Pretty spot on. It follows a trend I've noticed a lot in recent films and TV, where they're starting to take the very real effect that physical size has in fights into account, but finding realistic ways around it. I think one could argue that she won that second fight, depending on whether you define it as being over before the distraction occurred, or whether you say it continued.

[*]While this movie significantly changed and paired down the circumstances surrounding Himiko and her curse, and essentially removed the supernatural element entirely, I think it still did it justice. Part of that was because there’s a nice little twist that Lara realizes at the end. In this telling, Himiko was a queen with some sort of disease that rotted those she came in contact with and drove them mad. So, she organized her servants and army to bury her away on Yamatai to rid her people of her “curse.” That was a nice reversal and a neat way of showing another woman in control doing the right thing.

Again, mostly agree. I think I would have trouble deciding whether this element actually needed to be changed, but it works either way. And I do like having this non-supernatural explanation for something that the people in ancient times would have viewed as magical. Felt very Stargate-ish to me.

[*]It had very good, perhaps even excellent, renditions of two of the 2013 game’s most memorable scenes:

First, the reaching for the parachute as the old bomber breaks apart scene looked good in live action. It was well shot. It was well acted. It maintained that “Oh crap. Oh crap. Oh crap.” feel that made it so great in the game.

Oh totally. That scene felt exactly like the game. Nailed it.

The scene after she lands was extremely well done as well. It wasn't identical to the scene in the game where Lara gets wounded in a similar way, but the important part was there. And again, it was very well acted. A lot of films would really overdo it with over-exaggerated screaming and flailing, which is the opposite of what you actually hear from people who've sustained serious wounds like that in an accident. They always say how it doesn't hurt as much as you'd think initially, and they sometimes don't notice until they see it. Plus, Lara was likely being pursued and would have been trying to not make noise. And on top of all that, breathing hard or yelling would probably hurt on its own. All of that is what I saw portrayed.

Second, the scene where Lara first has to kill, while a bit different than in the game, is still excellent in the movie. It is certainly the movie’s best scene and Alicia Vikander does a truly terrific job going from fighting for her life, to realizing just what a terrible thing it is that the man she was fighting made her do. I would say this scene was at least as good as the one in the game. Really, I think it was better.

It was exactly as disturbing as the game scene, at least to me. This was a part where I could tell that she, and the other people who made the film, had played the same game I did and had felt the weight of the original scene.

[*]Even though there was a small, decent twist to the reason Himiko was buried on the island, a good deal was lost by removing the supernatural elements from the story.

Most notably, in the game Lara and company could not leave the island no matter what they did because Himiko’s power would sink their ship or strike down their plane or helicopter. That gave weight to having to find an actual solution. In the movie, the only reason anyone is trapped on the island is because nobody has a ship or aircraft handy at the moment. So it sorta removed the urgency and the feeling of being helplessly trapped on the island and cut off from the rest of the world that the game had. (We certainly did not get anything like the beautiful scene in the game where Lara climbs the tall tower and sends her distress signal.)

This is all true, but they did deal with the change in the film. Because it's such a remote island, normal modes of communication are still cut off - there's no cell service or internet access, obviously. And the location is portrayed as being somewhere that normal travel lanes don't go. Only the occasional wrecked fishing vessel. The ONLY link to the outside world is the satellite phone which Mathias possesses, and the plot directly involves that point as the only way to bring in transport. Sure, that transport ends up being called in differently than what Lara and Co. initially planned, but it's still consistently and realistically shown as the only way that anyone's going to have a way of leaving.

[*]The descent into Himiko’s tomb didn’t work so well because someone (the writers and or the director) decided that they had a well acted daughter in Lara and a decent actor as her father… so they might as well shoot for Indiana Jones and The Last Crusade.

The tomb traps and the not letting the book with all the information fall into the wrong hands felt too much like a poor imitation of The Last Crusade. The puzzles and traps weren’t nearly as iconic and really the whole thing just felt a bit unnecessary. So the whole sequence from finding the way into the tomb to getting to Himiko’s coffin just sorta dragged where it shouldn’t have.

This is the part where I have to admit to never having seen Indiana Jones (I want to, just haven't done it yet) so I can't really comment on any similarities there. I will say that it seemed fine to someone who doesn't have the basis to consider it a repeat.

I'm not sure her father actually needed to be in the film at all. The guy who played him didn't do a bad job or anything, I just felt like it could have worked if the character actually WAS dead. And in that case, Lara would have had to deal with that gut wound the way she did in the game, which I am NOT going to spoil for anyone who still hasn't seen it, because it's one of the most viscerally painful and affecting things I've encountered in a game. That could have worked very well on screen.

[*]The movie kept cutting back to the boat captain who helps Lara get to Yamatai even though he was entirely disconnected from the plot and happenings of the final 3rd of the movie.

While Lara is off playing Indiana Jones in Himiko’s cavern and tomb, this guy is rallying the oppressed workers to go back to Lara’s aid… except neither he nor they are ever actually relevant ever again. We get cuts to him saying “I won’t leave without Lara” when she is nowhere nearby (since she’s deep underground by that point) and he has exactly zero ability to help her in any way.

Honestly, I think it would have worked better if he’d attacked the guards to cover her escape and then been killed by the main bad guy.

*shrug*

I dunno, I didn't really mind that part. It was a way for there to be an overwhelming force to intimidate the chopper pilots at the end. I'm not sure Lara by herself, even holding a gun, would have been enough to make them think twice about trying to flee. 50 people with guns is too much to consider getting away - you're not going to make it off the pad. I guess they could have just wandered around on their own in the meantime, not being shown, and then helped with the chopper at the end - even without Lou being there and wanting to help Lara, they would have wanted to leave, after all. But it might have felt weird to have them just show up after having not been mentioned or shown for half the movie. But SOMETHING had to happen with them. They can't all just disappear, and because we've done away with the cult thing from the game, Lara can't just kill them all.

[*]There were a few places here and there that you could just kinda tell they didn’t have enough budget.

Like the reveal of Hikimo’s burial structure felt a bit underwhelming. When Lara is parachuting through the trees the action felt a bit… indistinct and blurred as if they didn’t have the time or budget to render the tress whipping by in high resolution. This wasn’t too bad, and it felt like they correctly made sure not to reach too far and have things end up looking awful. But, yeah, it was also clear that it would have been nice if they’d had just a bit more to work with.

Didn't even notice any of that TBH. I don't think I'm capable of thinking quite that critically about films, and I'm kind of OK with that.

Ultimately, Tomb Raider (2018) is not a great movie, but it is also not a terrible one. There are better options out there right now if you want to go to the theater. But, at the same time, it is not a cheesy, disrespectful rip-off like so many video game movies are. There are moments of cleverness, fun, and excellent acting. And there are moments where I felt they should have stuck closer to the 2013 game. The movie finishes a bit weaker than it starts, but at the end of the day there’s at least a chance that this thing gets a sequel. Because, at the very least, Alicia Vikander deserves another chance to portray Lara Croft.

She is quite good. I knew she was a strong dramatic actor, but I wouldn't have thought of her as someone who could do an action film. Turns out she can, and I'm glad she did. I think she sold the important scenes better than a "typical" action star would have.

Side Stuff:

1. There were a couple of bad reviews I saw over the last week that I wanted to call out. One from our own Cody Miller who said:

Also, for all the talk about female power and badassery, she was being saved by everyone else really often, and always crying.

I would say this is flat out false. As noted above, Lara is bested in the boxing ring by a fellow, friendly female fighter. The two appear almost equally matched except the other woman was just a good foot or two taller than Lara and won the match by having more weight and strength to throw around. Near the end of the movie Lara almost loses to the bad guy, but this is in the same way that Malcom Reynolds almost loses to the Operative in Serenity. A good, even fight where the bad guy almost wins but then the good guy (or girl in Lara’s case!) breaks free and strikes the winning blow.

Lara also gets impalled by a large splinter coming down through the trees similar to how she is injured in the 2013 game. And she is in some decent pain because of this for a while until her father is able to patch her wound. But… Lara also strangles and drowns the man hunting for her during this time, so she is hardly helpless and did not need to be saved by anyone.

Throughout the movie, just like throughout the two recent games, Lara is often at a disadvantage due to the numbers she faces or due to being physically smaller than her opponents. But in terms of tenacity, demeanor, intelligence, cleverness, and all that. Lara is more than an equal for any other character in the movie.

There's also the fact that, like the 2013 game, this is supposed to be an origin/coming-of-age story. And like that game, Lara doesn't start out as an unstoppable superhero. This is supposed to be the process she goes through to GET that way. She's not just going to magically win everything without any problems.

A few different reviews claiming that Lara magically healed too quickly after some of her injuries on the island, but I’m calling that completely false as well. After her biggest injuries the movie makes very sure to show her in pain for a significant amount of time and then takes the time to show her getting mended before she gets fully back >in the action.

Sure, in real life, getting stabbed like Lara does would have any of us home in bed or the ICU resting for weeks... but its an action movie and it does as good a job as any at having the hero be injured for a time. It certainly did not deserved to be called out for this kind of thing.

Yeah I didn't really see a problem there. The wound she sustained, while surely painful, could possibly have missed vital organs. It's totally plausible that she could have been mobile once it was stitched up and sterilized, which we definitely saw happen. She'd need to be very motivated and tough, but that's the point.

2. There were one or two reviews online that made it an issue that this movie is a reboot of the two previous movies and it is a movie based on the 2013 game that is itself a reboot of sorts of the previous games in the Tomb Raider series.

lolwut? So they're mad that the current movie tone follows the current games' tone, essentially. Mega-derp.

And, while I’ve never seen the two previous Tomb Raider movies, they both struck me as perhaps a bit over-sexed, and overly silly.

I only saw the first of the two, but it totally was. The only noteworthy thing I remember from that film is being delighted that Chris Barrie played Lara's butler.

This movie, in contrast, follows in the 2013 game’s excellent portrayal of Lara Croft as a more down to earth, character character who is intelligent, resourceful, heroic, and physically capable.

So, to me, the idea that its a bad thing that Tomb Raider (2018) is a rebooted movie based on a rebooted game is downright silly. I see it as a major plus that this movie gave us a live action portrayal of one of the best female video game heroes around.

Exactly. I struggle to follow the thought process that would lead one to believe otherwise. It's not even REALLY a reboot. The 2013 game was the reboot, this film is just going along with it.