Tomb Raider (2018)

[darkness2918]

Originally Posted by Chaotic

Vikander makes Jolie look like a joke in comparison.

Jolie is still the better Lara Croft IMO.

[Leonidas King]

Originally Posted by darkness2918

[Show spoiler]

Jolie is still the better Lara Croft IMO.

Of course she is.

Vikander felt short (no pun intended).

[darkness2918]

Originally Posted by Leonidas_King

In conclusion, I underestimated the 2001 version and it’s a downright masterpiece in comparison to this.

[Show spoiler]

Matter of fact, I was predispose to order both of them on 4K this afternoon after watching this cause I like them that much more

Ill probably rewatch the Jolie TR films over the weekend.

[mredman]

Originally Posted by y2jman

well I really wasn't sure if I would had like this reboot, since always like Angelina jolie ones<-prob not 2nd that much

anyways I thought Alicia did an excellent job as being new lara croft can't wait 2nd movie in the future

I hope so too. How much is enough for them to make a sequel. 230-250 million WW ?
EDIT:
First Jolie movie got a sequel with 274 million WW from a 115 million budget. This cost 94 million so i would say my number seems correct

[eightslicesofpie]

Much like Warcraft, I think this movie certainly had some missteps but on the whole was a pretty good and really entertaining movie.

I don't mean this in a "Disney pays off critics" sort of conspiracy way, but it feels to me like a lot of critics (and probably moviegoers too) still just have an inherent bias against video game movies because they've been, on the whole, pretty awful in the past. If you walk into a movie expecting to hate it, you're probably not going to enjoy it as much as you would otherwise.

That being said, I recognize that this and Warcraft were nowhere near masterpieces, but I thought they were quite good! (Assassin's Creed, on the other hand, was one of the worst and most boring movies I saw that year lol which was a huge let-down with how much I typically enjoy Fassbender)

I loved Vikander and her version of Lara--witty, smart, strong. The action was pretty exciting for the most part, and I was never bored.

The storyline itself was, as many have mentioned, the weak link--I didn't think it was particularly bad, just sort of generic. But Tomb Raider games are pretty typical action adventures, so my expectations for some huge revelatory story were not very high in the first place. If there is a sequel, though, hopefully they'd hire some good writers and punch up that side of things.

Overall, I thought it was a really fun time, which is what I want out of an action adventure. I'd gladly see a sequel ~

[coolkev1701]

Originally Posted by morphinapg

I recently rewatched the Jolie movies. Absolutely terrible. And honestly, I much prefer the more realistic take on the character in the newer games and movie than what the character was like back then anyway.

Yeah, before seeing this I watched the 4K versions of the Jolie movies. The first one is tolerable, but, man, The Cradle of Life is just painful. That movie was BAD when it came out, let alone now. Yeesh.

[Shallow_]

Originally Posted by coolkev1701

Yeah, before seeing this I watched the 4K versions of the Jolie movies. The first one is tolerable, but, man, The Cradle of Life is just painful. That movie was BAD when it came out, let alone now. Yeesh.

I also rewatched both TR's in 4k last weekend in preparation for yesterday.

I like em both, but this one was much better imo.

The only thing i felt it lacked was

[Show spoiler]a proper TR game survival sequence. After escaping and getting hurt it immediately jumps to the middle og the night when the tracker finds her. Instead, after pulling out the splinter i would have loved to see her finding som plants/herbs to tend to the wound, and also hunt and kill some food for the night before Meeting her father.

[coolkev1701]

Originally Posted by Shallow_

I also rewatched both TR's in 4k last weekend in preparation for yesterday.

I like em both, but this one was much better imo.

The only thing i felt it lacked was

[Show spoiler]a proper TR game survival sequence. After escaping and getting hurt it immediately jumps to the middle og the night when the tracker finds her. Instead, after pulling out the splinter i would have loved to see her finding som plants/herbs to tend to the wound, and also hunt and kill some food for the night before Meeting her father.

Yeah, I agree. This movie doesn't show us some of that stuff that was so cool in the game.

[Show spoiler]Like her arm is magically bandaged up at one point. Later, there's a bandage on her one leg that just comes out of nowhere. We don't see her do any of this stuff.

[DetroitSportsFan]

Originally Posted by darkness2918

Jolie is still the better Lara Croft IMO.

Yeah, at least Jolie looks the part.

[mwynn]

Originally Posted by DetroitSportsFan

Yeah, at least Jolie looks the part.

Jolie is two inches taller than Vikander.
Vikander weighs more than Jolie, because she put on muscle mass for the role.

Does Jolie look the part because she had fake boobs?

[eightslicesofpie]

Originally Posted by mwynn

Jolie is two inches taller than Vikander.
Vikander weighs more than Jolie, because she put on muscle mass for the role.

Does Jolie look the part because she had fake boobs?

At this point we should know that every time someone makes a dumb complaint about Vikander "not looking the part," it is because of her breasts

[dallywhitty]

A lot of folks don't seem to understand that Jolie and Vikander essentially played different characters.

[NARMAK]

I had a good time watching the movie even if it does feel like a rip off of the video game reboot with a few extra things thrown in. It's not the best action flick, but Lara was portrayed with heart and I would welcome a sequel if it's a better movie overall with a tighter and more original script.

[eightslicesofpie]

Originally Posted by NARMAK

I had a good time watching the movie even if it does feel like a rip off of the video game reboot with a few extra things thrown in. It's not the best action flick, but Lara was portrayed with heart and I would welcome a sequel if it's a better movie overall with a tighter and more original script.

The movie was directly based on the reboot game lol. This is like saying that The Great Gatsby movie feels like a rip-off of the novel

[NARMAK]

Originally Posted by eightslicesofpie

The movie was directly based on the reboot game lol. This is like saying that The Great Gatsby movie feels like a rip-off of the novel

I know that it was supposed to be based more around the game, but there was a lot more stuff in the game that they probably could have riffed off but instead they sort of inserted their own little sub plot into the overall games plot of Lara on this island that didn't quite jive for me. I thought they could have maybe had a few more things in there to give it substance but the story is perfectly serviceable. I found the opening scenes quite fun and different though for the very reason that's not like the game at all.

[Ant1010]

I guess everybody wanted something of this sorts for the running scenes

hot girl running with big boobs - YouTube

[MattJ1991]

Originally Posted by dallywhitty

A lot of folks don't seem to understand that Jolie and Vikander essentially played different characters.

This. The games changed course in a massive way with Square Enix’s reboot series. The Lara Croft in Tomb Raider and Rise of the Tomb Raider is very different then the Lara in the older games.

For the record I think Jolie did a serviceable job as that old style of Lara. Vikander did a good job in this one playing the new style of Lara. I could have done without the

[Show spoiler]bike and Hong Kong chase sequences

but I don’t blame her for those of course.

[morphinapg]

Originally Posted by eightslicesofpie

Much like Warcraft, I think this movie certainly had some missteps but on the whole was a pretty good and really entertaining movie.

I don't mean this in a "Disney pays off critics" sort of conspiracy way, but it feels to me like a lot of critics (and probably moviegoers too) still just have an inherent bias against video game movies because they've been, on the whole, pretty awful in the past. If you walk into a movie expecting to hate it, you're probably not going to enjoy it as much as you would otherwise.

That being said, I recognize that this and Warcraft were nowhere near masterpieces, but I thought they were quite good! (Assassin's Creed, on the other hand, was one of the worst and most boring movies I saw that year lol which was a huge let-down with how much I typically enjoy Fassbender)

I loved Vikander and her version of Lara--witty, smart, strong. The action was pretty exciting for the most part, and I was never bored.

The storyline itself was, as many have mentioned, the weak link--I didn't think it was particularly bad, just sort of generic. But Tomb Raider games are pretty typical action adventures, so my expectations for some huge revelatory story were not very high in the first place. If there is a sequel, though, hopefully they'd hire some good writers and punch up that side of things.

Overall, I thought it was a really fun time, which is what I want out of an action adventure. I'd gladly see a sequel ~

I think it might be about trying to uphold a reputation as a critic. If they rate a video game movie as good, they might be seen as less reputable by their peers. It's incredibly stupid, but I think that's part of it.

Originally Posted by coolkev1701

Yeah, I agree. This movie doesn't show us some of that stuff that was so cool in the game.

[Show spoiler]Like her arm is magically bandaged up at one point. Later, there's a bandage on her one leg that just comes out of nowhere. We don't see her do any of this stuff.

Maybe some deleted scenes.

Originally Posted by eightslicesofpie

At this point we should know that every time someone makes a dumb complaint about Vikander "not looking the part," it is because of her breasts

Even though that's what the new Lara looks like. They thought the old model was too unrealistic.

Originally Posted by dallywhitty

A lot of folks don't seem to understand that Jolie and Vikander essentially played different characters.

Exactly. The games were rebooted, and this movie is based on that reboot. It's simply a different series, a different character.

Originally Posted by MattJ1991

This. The games changed course in a massive way with Square Enix’s reboot series. The Lara Croft in Tomb Raider and Rise of the Tomb Raider is very different then the Lara in the older games.

For the record I think Jolie did a serviceable job as that old style of Lara. Vikander did a good job in this one playing the new style of Lara. I could have done without the

[Show spoiler]bike and Hong Kong chase sequences

but I don’t blame her for those of course.

I think those scenes were important in setting up her athletic ability. It definitely improves on that aspect of the game, where you wonder how this supposed spoiled rich girl would have the ability to do the things she does in the game, physically speaking.

[RalphoR]

Whatever version of game Lara Croft you like she was extremely athletic to do all the acrobatics to get around and solve problems/puzzles. In this movie I know a lot of people are having issues with

[Show spoiler]the bike scene and the Hong Kong dock scene

but could you see Angelina Jolie do either? Not a chance.

[Leonidas King]

Originally Posted by RalphoR

Whatever version of game Lara Croft you like she was extremely athletic to do all the acrobatics to get around and solve problems/puzzles. In this movie I know a lot of people are having issues with

[Show spoiler]the bike scene and the Hong Kong dock scene

but could you see Angelina Jolie do either? Not a chance.

That’s because the other ones didnt need all that unnecessary filler like with this new one.

I always loved how both past films start with an action piece first.