TOMB RAIDER being Re-booted!

[Rodrigo90]

http://m.totalfilm.com/news/kaya-scodelario-responds-to-tomb-raider-rumours

Don't know if anybody caught this. It's something

 

[Persona]

on one hand, if you simply must reboot a franchise, might as well be one that has only had sucky movies and maybe deserves better. on the other hand, does Tomb Raider really deserve better? i guess if they can make Lara Croft a genuinely interesting character beyond a female empowerment symbol with two guns and booty shorts, it could be worthwhile.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Lara was always more of a dude's wet dream than a female empowerment symbol. The filmmakers should try to change that and how to do that is to give her an actual personality in the new film. Croft was just Jolie sexy mugging in the original films, the character had no personality.

 

[Teelie]

Who says she wasn't/isn't both? She has a personality, or as much as any character like her does (male included) but it's easier to just see a female who has sex appeal and dismiss her as not being empowering. How many other female characters like that existed before? And how many since? It's not like she walked around in a bikini acting like a bimbo needing a man's help to do her job, although she had assistants who happened to be male, they didn't enable her, they assisted.

She did have a personality in the movies. Simplistic and bland but again, no more than any male character in the same movie. Nicholas Cage in National Treasure anyone? Even Indiana Jones took three movies to fully flesh out.

I won't argue that her chest could've been shrunk and she given less form-fitting clothing but it's all about compromise which seems to be a dirty word when it comes to feminine empowerment.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

We aren't going to agree on the personality thing. I find Jolie mostly stone faced sex kitten performances in action films to be boring anyhow but nothing wrong with people enjoying that sort of thing.

I more so blame the screenwriters and directors for the first TombRaider movies lousy quality of course.

 

[Teelie]

It's the same thing with the men who perform the roles to be honest only when it's a woman she's expected to emote more although I do agree the screenwriters and directors aren't trying very hard to make more detailed characters either.

 

[Van Petrol]

Btw, here's a Tomb Raider teaser I whipped up a while back. Enjoy!

Effy! Seriously, that is really good dude.

 

[Rodrigo90]

Kaya it is, Hollywood!

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

It's the same thing with the men who perform the roles to be honest only when it's a woman she's expected to emote more although I do agree the screenwriters and directors aren't trying very hard to make more detailed characters either.

I do not have a gender bias when it comes to criticizing performances. A lot of people on websites like this do have that bias but I do not. Saying that I want a personality does not mean I want some weepy lead character. Subtle, non emotional performances are fine, when they are good.

It's not some grand conspiracy against women or Jolie, I just didn't like her in the Tomb Raider films. I am one of the few women on here who call out the double standards in cinema on these boards, I do not appreciate the implication that my critique of Jolie's performance in the decade old Tomb Raider franchise is some secret sexist jab at women in action films.

 

[Teelie]

It was not that you were wrong to critique her acting but that you expected something more when even the traditional male characters often lack depth. Normally when I see someone complain about female action stars it's that they display no emotion or they act like men... which is funny because the men don't act much like men either.

It's actually a common trope; the character who exhibits little emotion or personality traits outside of being really good at being action-y and kicking ass or being a dare-devil.

Not Terminator lack of emotion but a lack of range and depth. There's plenty of exceptions but when you compare the two, you have more to pick from in the men catagory versus the women in action.

I'd love to see more films with women in lead action roles and not just eye-candy or an incompetent damsel in distress who is clearly not suited to the role. At the same time, I'd like to see the characters have more than boilerplate depth regardless of gender.

Even that these Tomb Raider movies were made and as successful as they were is something of a surprise because in Hollywood's mind, women aren't action stars so they are completely incompetent at writing them.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

With all due respect you have no right to tell me what I expected. You should stop assuming and just ask me. I will tell you even without your asking me.

I am not ignorant, of course I did not expect an award winning performance in an action adventure film. In regards to Jolie, I expected a decently cute, entertaining, charismatic moviestarish performance, I expected the character to be mildly likable. Not deep, not hugely likable but mildly. I felt that I didn't get that. I thought she was disappointly mediocre in everyway and somewhat unlikable. At best I was indifferent to Lara Croft as portrayed by Jolie.

As I stated before a large part of my problem with the character probably had nothing to do with Jolie. She was sattled with terrible scripts and directors who were phoning it in. I have to judge the performance though, even taking all that into consideration I still have to decide if I liked the performance and I did not.

How one views a performance is largely a subjective matter. I have no quarrel with anyone who appreciated Jolie's performance, I simply wasn't remotely satisfied with it. I have liked stone faced bad ass chick (there was some lame humor to her performance to be fair) performances before I simply didn't like Jolie's. Believe me I was more disappointed in the actual films than her performance so I don't mean to overstate her performance as a problem.

Maybe she could have been interesting to me in a different Tomb Raider series and maybe she wouldn't have been. I can't know because I only exist in this reality.

I deeply hate Hollywood's sexism and crave good action adventure films starring women. Even bad female led movies being successful is a good thing to me...98% of the time. I love seeing women as leads and kicking ass. Love it. And I do not want all female characters to be the same.

 

[Teelie]

I interepted what you were expecting and it was wrong, no need to start getting angry.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

I wasn't angry, mildly annoyed but not angry.

 

[Spider-Who?]

It's actually a common trope; the character who exhibits little emotion or personality traits outside of being really good at being action-y and kicking ass or being a dare-devil.

Not Terminator lack of emotion but a lack of range and depth. There's plenty of exceptions but when you compare the two, you have more to pick from in the men catagory versus the women in action.

You're referring to stoicism. There's a big difference between a character being stoic and a character being flat or lifeless. An actor can play a stoic character and yet show depth and maintain an audience's interest (look at Clint Eastwood's Man with No Name or, more recently, Ryan Gosling's Driver). In the case of Jolie in the Tomb Raider films, I'm sure they were going for a stoic Croft, but they too misunderstood and the character was a lifeless husk.

in Hollywood's mind, women aren't action stars so they are completely incompetent at writing them.

According to whom you listen to, Hollywood is completely incompetent at writing women, period.

 

[Teelie]

Stoic might have been a better word. Almost all action heroes are stoic to some degree but not a lot of them show a range of emotion or depth at it. Although even when they do it does get old seeing the same kind of determination and fearlessness in the face of danger. Not ever character must be the ideal but it ties back to Hollywood's limitation of range.

And of course Hollywood can't write women. They can only imitate what they steal are inspired by, poorly. In this case it's almost impossible to find a well written female action star. At least you can find well written female characters who aren't action stars. Although I suspect most of the well written characters are accidental anyways.

 

[Spider-Who?]

Although even when they do it does get old seeing the same kind of determination and fearlessness in the face of danger.

I'll agree with this part. It's why even after 30 years, Indiana Jones is still fresh - he fights Nazis, tanks, cults, etc and wins every time, but he usually fumbles his way to victory; he's always very clearly way over his head and they doesn't have an issue with showing that.

Raiders of the Lost Ark is great because they initially present him as your classic actin star who is all-knowing, gloomy, fearless and stoic. So you settle into the film expecting that type of character, only to have that notion turned on it's head within the first 15 minutes. Love it.

And of course Hollywood can't write women. They can only imitate what they steal are inspired by, poorly. In this case it's almost impossible to find a well written female action star. At least you can find well written female characters who aren't action stars. Although I suspect most of the well written characters are accidental anyways.

I'm kind of torn on the concept that Hollywood cannot write women, excluding overtly sexist or painfully stereotypical damsel roles. To categorize an entire sex into a check list that one must reference in order to write them well is just as sexist as a character legitimately hurt by sexism. The thought processes, emotions, personality and motivations for women are as varied as men, and yet seemingly contradictorily, both sexes are quite similar since we are all human. This is why the argument that tough female characters are "nothing more than male characters played by a female" is bogus in my eyes. People see a character that is tough, fearless, angry, etc and automatically assume that those emotions and physical expressions are exclusively male traits because they have conditioned themselves to assume that due to Hollywood's focus on male action stars and/or due to their own ignorance.

Conversely, when there's a female character who is NOT stoic - one who struggles either physically and emotionally, people call it stereotypical, sexist, etc. There really is no winning, since those who judge the quality of female characters in relation to male characters are typically totally clueless that they themselves are exacerbating the issue by trying to instill guidelines or boundaries on what a character must be, do, or say in order to be a "good *insert gender* character". It's ridiculous.

Personally, I think the only guideline that should come into play when writing a character REGARDLESS OF GENDER should be two things:

1) Is the character interesting/believable within the scope of the story?
2) Does the character adequately serve the needs of the plot?

Nothing else should matter.

 

[Teelie]

It is a complicated question. If you put the right conditions, then yes Hollywood can write a female role. However if you talk about the broad sense of female characters it doesn't come up so clearly that they do outside those conditions.

This is why I like the character of Ripley from the Alien franchise. She's clearly a woman but she isn't weak or fragile. She doesn't depict those tropes of the classic female who is helpless but she's not butch either.

She's just a person doing a job, thrown into a situation no one has ever encountered and has to figure it out herself. To top it off, she's not stoic. She's scared ****less and rightly so. No one should just be blasé about that and she acts exactly like someone who isn't fearless but won't let it win either.

But to bring it back to Tomb Raider, Croft is more stoic and has less depth which leads people to just call her eye candy or sexual symbolism even though that's only partly true.

Her motivation is there and some of her past but she's not given much of a reason to be who she is which is often true of these characters, like Nicholas Cage in the identical National Treasure. He's the Lara Croft counterpart to Indiana Jones in this situation. He should be more flawed and less confident than we see.

Neither character is especially well written but one seems to get more negative press for being female and not feminine enough (while at the same time I've seen her called too incapable for being female). Not that it was what I SEE SPIDEY specifically claimed but one I've seen often before to just assume it was another complaint she was just another bland character in a sea of bland characters. One who happened to be female and should stand out for it.

What I'd originally meant back at the start is it's unfair to single her out for playing a role that is always going to be bland. It's less to do with gender than it is with the role being always the same (stoic, barely able to emote, always fearless and confident, etc.).

 

[Spider-Who?]

I get you and agree that the character is fairly bland - it's the consequence of being from an era of video games where fully fleshed out characters were nearly non-existent. The movies attempted to bring some depth/give motivation while maintaining superhero-like qualities of stoicism and bad-assery, but the motivation was weak and the stoicism was overdone, resulting in a bland cookie cutter character, which is what they were trying to avoid. Had Jolie handled that same material in a more subtle or relatable way, I think the outcome would have been a little better.

The reboot game tried to solve these issues, and I think they did a fairly good job at making Lara Croft an actual person, which is always the place to start for a great character. I'm hoping that this new film follows suit.

 

[Persona]

I See Spidey, what'd you think of Haywire? very interested in your take, sorry, hope this isn't too OT.

 

[terry78]

I still don't know what Croft's personality is aside from just being sarcastic and badass.

 

[dark_b]

no offense guys. but if i get a rebooted TR movie before a WW movie i will beat some fans up. a second TR franchise before a superhero female movie?

 

[Teelie]

Wonder Woman is a strange one to bring up here. She started out as little more than some comic artist/writer's BDSM fetish if you look at some accounts and from the way she was frequently tied up with her own lasso I can see how that story started.

Of course now she's a better written and capable character these days but that origin still makes me laugh at the amount of change she's gone through over the past 70 years.

 

[Spider-Who?]

no offense guys. but if i get a rebooted TR movie before a WW movie i will beat some fans up. a second TR franchise before a superhero female movie?

A new Tomb Raider film isn't an active desire of mine - if one is made, I'll check it out and hope it's good but I'm more looking forward to the next game. As for a female-centric comic flick? Hell yeah. I couldn't care less about Wonder Woman though, to be honest.

 

[Loki882]

If it is in the vein of Indiana Jones, it could be really good. I suggest Lynn Collins or Rachel Weisz to play Lara.

 

[Pepsiguy2]

no offense guys. but if i get a rebooted TR movie before a WW movie i will beat some fans up. a second TR franchise before a superhero female movie?

Elektra. Catwoman