Lara Croft: Tomb Raider - Film Series Retrospective

It’s basically well-known at this point in the film fan community that films based on video games are often mediocre adaptations of their source material. Whether it’s due to them being made by a filmmaker who completely misunderstands the franchise (e.g. the infamous Uwe Boll) or because they just end up being way too derivative of other films, it truly is saying something when films ‘about’ video games (e.g. Tron) are usually better by comparison. I mean, to be fair, there have been some video game adaptations that have done decently with audiences like Mortal Kombat but nothing that can be considered as a ‘critically acclaimed’ project. And if recent releases like Duncan Jones’ Warcraft and Assassin’s Creed starring Michael Fassbender are any indication, we’re still not there yet when it comes to ‘great’ films based on video games regardless of who gets involved with them. Despite that, though, the hunt for the first ‘great’ video game adaptation continues this weekend with the release of Tomb Raider. Starring Alicia Vikander in the lead role of the adventurous explorer Lara Croft, the film is directly inspired by the 2013 video game of the same name. However, this is not the first time that Lara Croft has graced the big screen. Prior to this, she was portrayed by Angelina Jolie in a pair of films from the early 2000’s that, from what I can gather, tend to be some of the better-received video game film adaptations amongst most audiences. In fact, the first of these films still stands as the highest-grossing video game adaptation of all-time at the domestic box-office even after all the films that came after it that ultimately ended up out-grossing it worldwide. But before we delve further into these films, let’s briefly go over the history of their source material.

In 1996, video game developers Core Design created Tomb Raider, an action-adventure game that focused on a female gun-toting archeologist named Lara Croft who went on various adventures where she searched for treasure and took on various threats, often supernatural ones. Upon its release, the game was a huge critical/commercial success and is now often touted as one of the most influential video games of its genre. Core Design continued to produce follow-ups to the original game until 2003 following the poorly-received sixth installment, Angel of Darkness. Fellow game developers Crystal Dynamics then proceeded to take over production of the series the following year, which led to a solidly received revival of the franchise that lasted for a few years until the time came for another reboot. Thus, in 2013, a grittier take on the franchise, once again titled Tomb Raider and still produced by Crystal Dynamics, was released and once again succeeded in effectively reviving the series. But through it all, one thing has remained consistent; the characterization of Lara Croft. Since her debut back in the late 90’s, Lara has been an icon of the video game industry, regarded by many as one of the best female protagonists in video games. At the same time, though, Lara has also become rather infamous due to her overt sex appeal that was mainly due to the character’s, um, how do I put this… well-endowed physique. Ok, so there’s no real way of getting around this; back then, much attention was made over Lara having a voluptuous figure, something that has thankfully been underplayed in recent installments including the 2013 reboot that this new film is directly based on. But until then, let’s look at the two films that were produced during Lara’s first video game incarnation.

LARA CROFT – TOMB RAIDER (2001)

We start off, of course, with the franchise’s original big screen outing, Lara Croft: Tomb Raider. Released in 2001, the film was directed by Simon West (Con Air, The Expendables 2) and came out exactly at the time that the franchise’s initial run was truly in its heyday. But when Angelina Jolie was cast as Lara Croft, some were hesitant about her taking on the role for various reasons, ranging from her controversial personal life to the fact that she was American despite Lara being a British character. However, in hindsight, many would agree that she was fantastic in the role. Jolie perfectly personifies Lara’s swagger and her lust for thrills, not to mention the fact that she did her own stunts. And on that note, the film does feature some solid action set-pieces despite a few instances where the editing gets a bit too frenetic. Ultimately, though, the film mainly succeeds at being exactly what it’s trying to be; a simple but fun action-adventure story. I mean, if you look at it from a narrative perspective, this film goes down some truly ludicrous routes from time to time, especially once it starts to tackle the subject of time travel (yes, time travel). Still, the film never takes itself too seriously and, of course, it’s all buoyed by Jolie’s excellent turn as Lara. She even gets a surprisingly effective foil in the form of the film’s delightfully campy main antagonist, Manfred Powell (Iain Glen), a fellow explorer and member of the Illuminati who, like Lara, seeks the Triangle of Light, a device that, as noted earlier, allows its user to manipulate time. These two are joined by a solid supporting cast that includes Jolie’s real-life father Jon Voight as Lara’s father Richard and Daniel Craig (goofy American accent notwithstanding) as fellow tomb raider Alex West. In short, yes, this film is an undeniably goofy action-adventure flick, but as far as video game adaptations go, at the very least it did its job of capturing the spirit of Tomb Raider from the perspective of where the franchise was at the time.

Rating: 3.5/5

LARA CROFT – TOMB RAIDER: THE CRADLE OF LIFE (2003)

After the first Tomb Raider film turned out to be a smash hit at the box-office, a sequel ended up getting released two years later. Titled Lara Croft: Tomb Raider – The Cradle of Life, the film saw a change in director, with Jan de Bont taking on directorial duties for this installment. Prior to this film, de Bont was well-known for directing blockbusters like 1994’s Speed and 1996’s Twister; however, it’s also worth noting that this film ended up being his last major directorial effort to date. Not only that, but the film ended up receiving the same generally negative reception that its predecessor got while not doing as well financially despite having a smaller budget. But overall, I’d say that this film is on par with the original. Angelina Jolie is excellent once again as Lara, and while the film around her boasts a goofy plot in which she races to find Pandora’s Box, it does feature some more solid action sequences. And if there’s one advantage that this film has over its predecessor, it’s that it has better-filmed action sequences. Given that Jan de Bont is no stranger to the old-school era of the action genre having done the cinematography for films like The Hunt for Red October and the vaunted ‘holiday classic’ that is Die Hard, there isn’t as much frenetic editing in this film’s action sequences compared to the first. And while the villain (a scientist named Reiss played by Ciaran Hinds) isn’t as strong as the one in the first, this one gives Lara a better ‘love interest’. Yes, despite what I said before about Daniel Craig being a solid supporting player in the first film despite the accent, his character shared little screen-time with Lara despite the film’s attempt at trying to establish romantic tension between the two; heck, there wasn’t even any resolution to their relationship. Here, though, Gerard Butler’s Terry Sheridan plays a far greater role in the story and he has solid chemistry with Jolie. Thus, while it’s just as silly as its predecessor, Lara Croft: Tomb Raider- The Cradle of Life is still technically a better video game film than many others in its genre.

Rating: 3/5

And that ends this retrospective on the Tomb Raider films starring Angelina Jolie from the early 2000’s. While by no means masterpieces, it’s easy to see why these films are considered as some of the better installments of the video game film genre. Arguably the best thing that you can say about them is that they at least perfectly captured the spirit of what the franchise was like at the time, as will no doubt be the case with the new Tomb Raider film that took inspiration from the franchise’s current era. You can expect a review of that film sometime this week, but until then, be sure to sound off in the comments below with your own thoughts on these two films.  

Justice League (2017) review

For the past decade, Marvel Studios has dominated the superhero film genre thanks to the Marvel Cinematic Universe, which was an unprecedented success story as nothing like it had ever been done before in the context of live-action films. After starting out strong with a series of solo outings that slowly but surely began to lay down the foundation for a larger universe, the MCU truly hit it big in 2012 when it brought all of its main heroes together in what ultimately became one of the landmark entries of the genre, The Avengers. But while the Avengers have undoubtedly become one of the most famous squads in the world of film, there is another superhero team that is arguably more iconic than them. I’m, of course, referring to DC Comics’ own legendary superhero group, the Justice League. Ever since the group’s initial creation in 1960 as a revamp of DC’s Justice Society of America, the Justice League, made up of several of the company’s most legendary heroes including the Holy Trinity of Superman, Batman, and Wonder Woman, has become a staple of the DC universe. Aside from their various runs in the comics, the team has also left its mark on other facets of pop culture, including several video games (e.g. the Injustice fighting games) and a bunch of hit TV shows, most notably the Justice League cartoons from the early 2000’s that were created by the team behind the iconic Batman: The Animated Series. And now almost six decades after their initial comic debut, the Justice League has finally hit the big-screen in DC’s highly-anticipated crossover event.

However, the journey that this film has gone on to make it to this point has been rather rocky, to say the least. A full decade prior to its release, a different iteration of Justice League was in the works under the direction of Mad Max creator George Miller. Ultimately, though, this version ended up falling by the wayside due in large part to the 2007-08 Writers’ Strike. It wouldn’t be until after Warner Bros and DC managed to successfully resurrect the Superman franchise in 2013 with Zack Snyder’s Man of Steel that the idea of a Justice League film was once again put into motion. And thus, the DC Extended Universe, DC and Warner Bros.’ answer to the MCU, was born; but again, things haven’t exactly gone smoothly for this franchise since its inception. While both Man of Steel and its 2016 follow-up Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice (which introduced Ben Affleck’s rendition of the titular Dark Knight) did perform solidly at the box-office, they also yielded an extremely polarizing response from both critics and audiences. Simply put, these films have had as many extremely devoted fans as they’ve had their extremely vocal critics. Thankfully, though, the franchise did manage to rebound a bit this year thanks to the long-awaited solo outing for DC’s legendary heroine, Wonder Woman, a well-deserved success story for everyone involved on that production, especially director Patty Jenkins and lead actress Gal Gadot. But now we turn our attention to director Zack Snyder’s third entry in the DCEU, Justice League, which… is once again proving to be quite controversial amongst critics. And to be perfectly blunt… this time I can see exactly where they’re coming from when it comes to this film’s biggest issues.

At the end of Batman v. Superman, Bruce Wayne AKA the Gotham City vigilante Batman (Ben Affleck) saw his faith in humanity restored following the noble sacrifice of his ‘nemesis’ turned ally Superman (Henry Cavill) against the monstrous creature known as Doomsday. Despite this, however, the world finds itself plunging into greater chaos following Superman’s death, effectively leaving it open for an invasion by the god-like being known as Steppenwolf (portrayed by Ciaran Hinds via motion-capture). Backed by his army of extraterrestrial creatures known as Parademons, Steppenwolf seeks to reclaim the three mysterious devices hidden on Earth known as ‘Mother Boxes’ that grant unparalleled power to those that use them. To deal with the invasion, Bruce and Diana Prince AKA the Amazonian warrior Wonder Woman (Gal Gadot) begin to recruit those who are just like them (referred to in the DC universe as ‘metahumans’) in order to form a team that’s powerful enough to take on Steppenwolf and his army in light of Superman’s absence. In the process, the two end up recruiting Arthur Curry AKA Aquaman, the ruler of the undersea kingdom of Atlantis (Jason Momoa), college student Barry Allen AKA the speedster known as ‘the Flash’ (Ezra Miller), and Victor Stone (Ray Fisher), a former football star who was turned into a cyborg after a near-fatal car accident.

Simply put, when this film focuses on what audiences came to see (namely, the Justice League in action), it does deliver on that front. There are tons of great character moments here and there to satisfy the DC Comics faithful who have been waiting to see these characters together onscreen for years. However... that doesn’t mean that this film is devoid of some major flaws. For one thing, it’s all over the place when it comes to its tone. This aspect of the DCEU has been a primary source of contention amongst critics as both Man of Steel and Batman v. Superman were heavily criticized for being too dour. Thankfully with this film, an attempt was at least made for it to be more light-hearted compared to its predecessors; and yet, despite this, its attempts at humor are hit and miss at best. It also tries to balance said humor with some of the more serious aspects of the plot, something that it doesn’t necessarily succeed at doing. Overall, it seems as if a lot of this film’s tonal issues were a direct result of the biggest moment that occurred during its production, when Snyder was forced to step away from the film due to the death of his daughter and Joss Whedon (who, of course, is no stranger to this genre) was brought in to oversee rewrites and reshoots. However, while watching this film, it becomes abundantly clear that Whedon was forcibly rushed when it came to the process of finishing it, resulting in not only those aforementioned tonal issues but also some dodgy CGI as well (e.g. the now-infamous attempts that were made to digitally remove the mustache that Henry Cavill had grown prior to reshoots that he had to keep for the upcoming Mission Impossible 6).

Among other things, this film is primarily tasked with serving as the proper ‘introduction’ of three new main characters to the DCEU; Flash, Aquaman, and Cyborg. Although the three of them had already technically been introduced in Batman v Superman via a series of brief cameos, this film serves as the first instance where they were each given a lead role. And overall, the film does do a decent job of establishing the DCEU’s iterations of these classic characters, as each main protagonist (both new and returning) does manage to get his or her own standout moment. Despite what I said before about the film’s humor being rather spotty, Ezra Miller’s Flash does get a lot of the best lines in the film as the inexperienced rookie who’s brought in to help deal with a daunting ‘save the world’ scenario. As for Aquaman, while it seems like a lot of his character development is being saved for his upcoming solo film next year, Jason Momoa does, at least, make a good first impression as DC’s often mocked aquatic-based superhero. Finally, with Cyborg, Ray Fisher does a good job of conveying the character’s inner turmoil given his tragic backstory. As for the returning heroes, both Gal Gadot and Ben Affleck are solid once again as Wonder Woman and Batman, respectively. Gadot continues to shine as the DCEU’s best protagonist, even amidst all of this film’s shortcomings, and Affleck still stands strong as the DCEU’s grizzled interpretation of the Dark Knight. And for those who weren’t too big on how Batman was portrayed in BvS, namely via his tendency to kill bad guys, you’ll be pleased to know that they do dial back on that characterization here.

Now, at the risk of delving into spoiler territory (though, really, everyone basically knew this already going in)… yes, Superman returns in this film after the character’s death in BvS. I won’t be getting into the exact specifics of how he’s brought back but I will say that, with this film, Henry Cavill has thankfully been given the chance to, shall we say, ‘act’ like Superman. Granted, I did think that he did a solid job in the previous two films that he appeared in but, at the same time, those films didn’t exactly give him the best material to work with, either. With Justice League, though, we finally get a Superman reminiscent of Christopher Reeve’s iconic iteration of the character from the original Superman films. But while all of the main leads get a solid amount of material to work with in this film, the same can’t be said for its supporting characters as they are all basically limited to ‘cameo’ appearances a la Flash, Aquaman, and Cyborg in BvS. This applies to not only returning DCEU players like Amy Adams as Lois Lane and Connie Nielsen as Diana’s mother Queen Hippolyta but also newcomers like Mera, Queen of Atlantis (Amber Heard), and J.K. Simmons’ version of Commissioner Jim Gordon, characters that are clearly being intended to have more substantial roles in future films. And as for the main villain, Steppenwolf… he’s practically a non-existent threat. Despite Ciaran Hinds’ best efforts in the role, the character gets nothing of value to work with here; no backstory, no sense of what he’s trying to accomplish, no indication of his relationship to another famous DC comics antagonist (and future big bad of the DCEU) Darkseid, etc.  In other words, he’s one of the genre’s weakest villains ever.

So before any of the hardcore DCEU fans out there get on my case because of what I’ve said in this review, let me be perfectly clear; I didn’t outright ‘dislike’ Justice League. As I said before, when it focuses on its titular squad of superheroes, it does lead to some great character moments between them. At the same time, though, the overall execution is quite sloppy. While I do appreciate the efforts that were made by Zack Snyder and company to avoid delving into the dour tone that many felt plagued Batman v Superman, the film still suffers from having a rather inconsistent tone. And while the main leads are all solid in their respective roles, the plot is basic, the humor is hit or miss, and the main villain is pathetically weak. In short, a lot of this feels rushed, which arguably isn’t that surprising seeing how this came out only one year after Batman v Superman. And while both Snyder and Joss Whedon tried their best to fix some of the most glaring issues that people have had with previous DCEU installments (save for Wonder Woman), it just wasn’t enough to overcome the immense time crunch that they were both clearly under. With that said, though, if you’re a long-time fan of DC and these characters, I bet that you’ll probably be satisfied with this long-awaited live-action adaptation of arguably the most famous superhero team in all of pop culture… who, quite frankly, deserved a hell of a lot better than what is practically the DC equivalent of Fan4stic. I wish I was kidding about that comparison, but I’m not; granted, it’s nowhere near as bad as Fan4stic, but it too is a case of a studio trying to salvage a reportedly disastrous cut of their tent-pole release only to make things worse in the process.

Rating: 2.5/5 (So yeah, my streak of giving every major superhero film this year a 5/5 rating officially ends here. Still, despite my issues with Justice League, this has been one of the genre’s greatest years ever, which is something that will certainly be emphasized in my impending ‘Best Films of the Year’ list. But as for this film… well, as much as I hate to say it, it is most likely going to end up appearing on… the other list…)