TOMB RAIDER Reboot (Alicia Vikander)! - Part 2

[Iceman]

Yeah - for video gamers. Movies have a much bigger and broader audience. Most of the general public won't be particularly familiar with Tomb Raider except as a pop culture icon.

Agreed. Those who have played (or at least intend to play) the reboot I would consider fans and everyone else I would consider to be the GA in this case.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Agreed. Those who have played (or at least intend to play) the reboot I would consider fans and everyone else I would consider to be the GA in this case.

People who stopped gaming years ago probably don’t know the reboot games exist. I stopped gaming 20 years ago and only really got back into it a couple of years ago when I heard they were re-making FF7.

I didn’t know about the reboot games until about 6 months after I bought my PS4.

 

[Lily Adler]

So the curse of video games cannot be made into movies continues.

 

[Hunter Rider]

I enjoyed it, I thought they took their time to set the stage and develop Lara with a very good performance from Alicia, and she clearly threw herself into the physical side of things, her Lara goes through the ringer.

It's always difficult to balance the mechanics of these type of games with movie action it seems, but I thought they did a pretty good job, there's only one standout set piece and that's where Lara escapes the camp, as I'd agree with flickchick, it's hard to see where the budget went.

I didn't mind the deviations from the game but I do wonder if they were due tro budget restrictions, as the finale is very low key for what it could have been had they stuck closer to the game.

I don't think I've ever seen Walton Goggins so restrained, he kind of game off like a heel version of Rick Grimes here, he was fine in the role but I was expecting a more intense character. The only other support character to get any shine is Lara's pops and he was serviceable ([BLACKOUT]his death was anticlimactic[/BLACKOUT]) in a role that was another deeviation from the game.

All in all it's a decent origin movie for Lara Croft that establishes Alicia Vikander in the role, and places pieces in motion for a sequel that I hope she gets the chance to make.

7/10

 

[Galactus123]

I just saw this and it was a very good movie. I didn't expect to like it this much. Trailers and posters didn't make this look good at all. Alicia Vikander was great and I liked the story. Few times I wished this wouldn't have been PG-13 but it didn't bother me. More blood would have been great like in the game. I hope there will be sequels.

About the ending:

Spoiler

I didn't like the references to the classic Lara Croft. That hairstyle and the dual pistols didn't need to be there. This should be about the reboot game.

 

[Web-Head]

So the curse of video games cannot be made into movies continues.

Not really. Tomb Raider is the best one yet and it was pretty good IMO

 

[Web-Head]

https://www.forbes.com/sites/scottm...huge-hit-for-a-video-game-movie/#693175587fe8

Tomb Raider did not hold up like the second coming of Batman Begins this weekend, falling 57% in its second domestic weekend to earn just $10.1 million and bring its ten-day domestic total to just $41.4m thus far. At a glance, barring a second wind, it looks like the Alicia Vikander video game adaptation will earn over/under $62m domestic, smaller than Tomb Raider: The Cradle of Life ($65.6m in 2003) but larger than Assassin's Creed ($54.5m in 2016). So it will enter the top ten in terms of unadjusted domestic earnings for straight-up video game adaptations. But thanks to a solid overseas run, it's already something of a big hit for the beleaguered sub-genre that is the video game adaptation.

With a decent $69 million in China and halfway decent play in the rest of the world, the MGM and Warner Bros./Time Warner Inc. release has earned $170m outside of North America thus far. That puts the film at $211.7m worldwide in about two full weeks of play (it opened on the week of March 9 in nine Asian markets). That may not be a queen's ransom, but A) it puts the film on course to triple its $94m production budget and B) already makes it one of the biggest video game adaptations of all time in terms of worldwide box office. Moreso than most Hollywood genres, the video game adaptation tends to flop in America while (occasionally) soaring overseas.

The ten video game adaptations that have topped $200 million worldwide have earned, on average, 77.39% of their money overseas. Heck, if you remove the outlier (Angelina Jolie's Tomb Raider, which earned 52% of its $274 million gross overseas way back in 2001), the number jumps to 80.1% among the nine other biggest video game grossers. Resident Evil: The Final Chapter sits at fourth on the list with $312m (including $159.5m in China alone), but it is ranked 24th out of 42 on the domestic list having earned a record 91% of its global gross overseas. Universal/Comcast Corp.'s Warcraft played great (for about a week) in China, earning $213.5m of its $433m global cume in that single territory, but even the biggest-grossing video game movie worldwide was A) a flop in terms of gross versus budget, marketing costs and franchise-friendly expectations and B) ranks 19th among domestic earners when adjusted for inflation (11th unadjusted) among video game flicks.


So, as much as I talk about why the whole "Eh, overseas grosses can save it!" thinking is a general falsehood when it comes to Hollywood blockbusters, it may be relatively true in terms of video game adaptations. Although, and this is a big caveat, most of these films were not "hits." Walt Disney's Prince of Persia earned $330 million worldwide in 2010, but on a $200m budget. Tomb Raider is (thus far) unique in that it is underperforming in North America but doing well enough on a comparatively responsible budget to potentially qualify as a "hit." Unlike Michael Fassbender's Assassin's Creed, it didn't cost $125m to produce, so anything close to $300m worldwide is a relative win.

Speaking of which, right now, Tomb Raider sits as the ninth-biggest video game movie of all time in unadjusted worldwide grosses. Once it passes $241 million, it'll top Resident Evil: Retribution ($240m) and Assassin's Creed ($240.6m) to take seventh place. If it can get to $274m (which is probable at this juncture), it'll pass the unadjusted $274m gross of Angelina Jolie's first Tomb Raider from way back in 2001. That Paramount/Viacom Inc. release is still the biggest-grossing video game movie ever in North America, with $131m domestic. If it continues to earn 80% of its money overseas and makes it to $63m domestic, that's a $315m global cume, or just over the $312m gross of Resident Evil 6. At a glance, it should have just enough gas to be the sixth video game flick to top $300m worldwide, and that's presuming it doesn't rebound in North America.

And if this all comes to pass (as opposed to me merely being overly optimistic), then MGM and WB will have to have a serious conversation about whether a sequel makes sense. Yes, having a franchise is considered a great thing even if that franchise isn't all-that. But now that we've introduced a winning Lara Croft, a similarly-budgeted Rise of the Tomb Raider, one with less world-building and origin story tropes and more "let Lara Croft be Lara Croft" butt-kicking and tomb raiding, could be a plausible concept. But either way, Tomb Raider may turn into one of those "bombed in America/saved overseas" flicks that was cheap enough to actually get by on an overseas rescue. And if you're wondering why Hollywood keeps making video game movies, that 80% overseas average is probably as good a guess as any.

 

[DaddlerTheDalek]

I think this movie is rather good. I like Vikander as Lara.

 

[flickchick85]

So the curse of video games cannot be made into movies continues.

Nah, this was a movie. Not a great one, but a coherent and mostly competently-made one with an actual character/performance at its heart. With a few adjustments it would've been a good one.

If anything, this movie further proved to me that using one of the actual games as a blueprint is a good way to go. IF that game has a decent story. Because this was a step in the right direction, imo, and it mostly used the story of the 1st game.

 

[Frankeh]

Yeah the issues with this movie are easily identifiable and are not something inherent with it being a video game movie.

 

[TheVileOne]

Nah, this was a movie. Not a great one, but a coherent and mostly competently-made one with an actual character/performance at its heart. With a few adjustments it would've been a good one.

If anything, this movie further proved to me that using one of the actual games as a blueprint is a good way to go. IF that game has a decent story. Because this was a step in the right direction, imo, and it mostly used the story of the 1st game.

I mean by metrics of reviews, 50 percent on Rotten Tomatoes, and box office, it isn't really breaking the curse.

Daisy Ridley is better off having not starred in this film.

 

[flickchick85]

I mean by metrics of reviews, 50 percent on Rotten Tomatoes, and box office, it isn't really breaking the curse.

Daisy Ridley is better off having not starred in this film.

50 percent literally means split down the middle, so compared to the reception of other videogame adaptations, this one is obviously a step forward. Did it break the curse? No. But it's progress, and by no means suggests "video games cannot be made into movies." Because this one was, and by the accounts of half the critics, it was actually a decent one.

But yes, I agree Daisy Ridley is better off. She's got a better franchise already. Vikander doesn't - she has an Oscar but is not recognizable to the general public - and I don't think this film was bad for her at all. The consensus despite reviews is that she made a pretty solid Lara Croft, and now more people will know who she is.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Nah, this was a movie. Not a great one, but a coherent and mostly competently-made one with an actual character/performance at its heart. With a few adjustments it would've been a good one.

If anything, this movie further proved to me that using one of the actual games as a blueprint is a good way to go. IF that game has a decent story. Because this was a step in the right direction, imo, and it mostly used the story of the 1st game.

Definitely, in fact I think if they had stuck closer to the game the movie would have been even better. The bits they added were the weaker parts of the movie. Though I must admit the [BLACKOUT]father [/BLACKOUT] stuff did add some emotional beats.

Really hope overseas can save this one, Alicia kicks ass in the role and deserves another movie as Lara, if not a franchise.

 

[jmc]

Nah, this was a movie. Not a great one, but a coherent and mostly competently-made one with an actual character/performance at its heart. With a few adjustments it would've been a good one.

If anything, this movie further proved to me that using one of the actual games as a blueprint is a good way to go. IF that game has a decent story. Because this was a step in the right direction, imo, and it mostly used the story of the 1st game.

I don’t know actually know if it was a good move. The takeaway I have from this film is that Lara Croft doesn’t benefit from an origin story, or at the very least she doesn’t need an entire movie to tell her origin. I think this movie would have been far better served starting with her fully formed, basically just start with the third act and tell the sequel story teased at the end.

 

[samsnee]

Based on overseas performance I wonder if they will green light a sequel.

 

[flickchick85]

I don’t know actually know if it was a good move. The takeaway I have from this film is that Lara Croft doesn’t benefit from an origin story, or at the very least she doesn’t need an entire movie to tell her origin. I think this movie would have been far better served starting with her fully formed, basically just start with the third act and tell the sequel story teased at the end.

Well I can only speak for myself, but I think an origin story is simply necessary to get me on board with this character. Never cared one iota for the old Lara in the games or movies. She was just your basic "badass hot chick" with no real human qualities I could discern. The reboot game got me invested in the character and actually made me want to see her future adventures. This movie at least somewhat managed that as well.

 

[jmc]

It's because that Lara was more of a cartoon character, but she was also quick witted, confident and intelligent too. Kind of a mix of Indiana Jones and James Bond.

 

[flickchick85]

But lacking any of the qualities that made me love the former, lol. The reboot game added a bit of Indy's underdog quality, which I appreciated.

 

[jmc]

My biggest issue was that it kinda robbed her of her personality. Not to mention they got rid of her duel pistols which was her signature weapons. I kept expecting at some point during the game for her to get two guns but it didn't happen. The game is good but you could replace her with any female character and nothing would change.

 

[flickchick85]

I feel the same way about old Lara and her "personality" so to each their own, lol.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

My biggest issue was that it kinda robbed her of her personality. Not to mention they got rid of her duel pistols which was her signature weapons. I kept expecting at some point during the game for her to get two guns but it didn't happen. The game is good but you could replace her with any female character and nothing would change.

You do actually get the dual pistols in the final fight in the reboot game, granted it's towards the end of the fight but they are still there.

Haven't played Rise yet so can't comment on that.

And I disagree about Lara needing an origin story also, the reboot game really made you root for her. Thankfully they brought that to the movie as well, though Alicia was a large part of that.

 

[MagnarTheGreat]

I don't have a problem with an origin story for the character as concept. But then again I like origin stories in general and often I find the post-origin sequels are where the writers don't know where to take the story or further develop the characters or they just have bad ideas.

 

[Kane52630]

Neither movie ever gave her any personality. Especially with this one.

 

[MagnarTheGreat]

Current user scores

Group 1
IMDb (weighted): 6.8
IMDb (raw unweighted): 7.0
Metacritic: 6.7
Rotten Tomatoes: 7.0
Rotten Tomatoes (liked): 65%
Letterboxd: 6.0
Amazon: 7.8
Google (liked): 88%
Apple iTunes: 9.2
Group 1 average: 7.31

Group 2
Douban (China): 6.4
Mtime (China): 6.8
Allocine (France): 7.4
Filmstarts (Germany): 7.0
MyMovies (Italy): 6.22
Yahoo! (Japan): 6.72
Daum (South Korea): 6.1
Filmaffinity (Spain): 6.0
Amazon (U.K.): 7.6
Group 2 average: 6.69

Overall average: 7.10

 

[jmc]

You do actually get the dual pistols in the final fight in the reboot game, granted it's towards the end of the fight but they are still there.

Haven't played Rise yet so can't comment on that.

And I disagree about Lara needing an origin story also, the reboot game really made you root for her. Thankfully they brought that to the movie as well, though Alicia was a large part of that.

I haven't played Rise either yet but from my understanding it's still very much in rookie Lara mode. I kinda just want to see the dual guns and the braided pony tail make an appearance in Shadow, I don't even really care if the shorts and green tank top make an appearance. At least they teased that in this movie, for a sequel we'll probably never get.