Lara Croft Tomb Raider: The Cradle of Life

[DevilMonkey]

Lara Croft Tomb Raider: The Cradle of Life(2003)

http://i.imdb.com/Photos/Ss/0325703/poster.jpg

http://darkhorizons.com/2003/tomb2/tomb1.jpg

http://darkhorizons.com/2003/tomb2/tomb4.jpg

http://darkhorizons.com/2003/tomb2/tomb6.jpg

Produced by-

Lawrence Gordon
Lloyd Levin
Louis Stroller

Director -

Jan de Bont

Screenwriters-

Kirk Petruccelli
Lloyd Levin
Christian Wagner

Starring-

Angelina Jolie
Gerard Butler
Chris Barrie
Noah Taylor
Ciarán Hinds
Ronan Vibert
Robert Cavanah
Djimon Hounsou
Til Schweiger
Robert Atiko
Fabiano Martell
Andrew Joshi
Simon Yam
Terence Yin

MPAA-

PG-13

Release Date-

July 25, 2003

Plot-

Sequel to the 2001 film adaptation of the highly successful Eidos interactive game. The Cradle of Life chronicles the adventures of British aristocrat Lara croft sent on a perilous mission to rescue the world from the exploits of an evil Chinese crime syndicate led by oriental crime lord Chen Lo. He has gone in search of the 'Cradle of Life', a remote place somewhere in the world said to house a weapon of unimaginable power - Pandora's Box.

Genre-

Action, Adventure, Thriller

My thoughts-

If you’ve seen Tomb Raider 1 and haven’t seen the new trailer, chances are you are defiantly not looking forward to this. We’ll I believe that I may be the only person who actually thought the movie was really cool and well done. Might have been boring at times and Jolie is a dog but beside that it was great (at least I thought so). As for this one I think it looks even better. The trailer looks great, and in one of the scenes Jolie looks sort of average :) In the trailer there is also a scene when Lara grabs a shark and I thought it might be a very cool scene. I also really like the one of the producers. Larry Gordan, who also made field of dreams, 48 Hours and some other classic stuff. I hate the poster but everything else looks cool. I’ll be there opening weekend (Sunday because I come back from France on Saturday)

http://darkhorizons.com/2003/tomb2/tomb5.jpg

http://darkhorizons.com/2003/tomb2/tomb7.jpg

http://darkhorizons.com/2003/tomb2/tomb8.jpg

What Do You Guys Think?

[dh1989]

The first film was one of the worst of 2001. It was utter shite. And this one looks WORSE! It seems they took the dreadful action and story of the first, but dropped the story, so we're left with mindless, and boring, action sequences, an annoying Jolie, and an overlong title. No thanks!

http://i.imdb.com/Photos/Ss/0325703/cradle04.jpg

[Strider]

Well, I'm one of the select few who actually enjoyed the first "Tomb Raider" film. It was solid popcorn fun, and I thought Angelina Jolie was just perfect as Lara Croft herself. As for this sequel, it doesn't really look that good or interesting. But I'll be checking it out anyway, with hopes that Jan De Bont can turn it into an entertaining and fun flick....

Strider

[dh1989]

Here's a review of Lara Croft Tomb Raider: The Cradle of Life from 'Atomike' at Ain't It Cool News, It has spoilers, but they're clearly marked....

Hey, Harry.

I finally have something you may be interested in.

I was in New York this week for a digital video convention, and was lucky enough to get into a sneak preview of Tomb Raider 2 at the Lowe’s 24-plex. Most of the theatre was reserved for reviewers (and I think some Paramount execs too), but the bottom non-stadium-seating section was open to the street-trash like me.

Anyway, my thoughts on the film... it’s pretty ok. Not great, just pretty ok. There were some pretty good actions sequences, as you might have guessed, and a plot that didn’t make me roll my eyes as much as I thought it would. The whole “cradle of life” thing, which I thought would be dumb, was actually pretty dumb, but I found myself drawn into the movie enough that it didn’t matter too much. The action was good, and so I didn’t mind some of the weakness in the plot. I guess my main gripe with this film is the hollywood-ization of Lara Croft. When I think of the character (to be fair I’ve never played a Tomb Raider video game), I think of a Tomb RAIDER, i.e. someone who is not necessarily the good guy all the time. This Lara Croft is more of a traditional hero rather than the rogue you cheer for-despite her amoral tendencies. That’s the kind of movie I wanted to see. This movie does have it’s fun moments, but I think the first Tomb Raider did it better.

I have to admit, however, that I did jump out of my seat pretty good at least once – [Spoiler] during a shark-attack scene, which looks and plays very good. It’s easily my favorite part of the whole film. The ending is also not too shabby either.


















































Spoiler space, baby...






































No, seriously... it's a doozy...






































Okay... I warned you...

[Major Spoiler] I was concerned that Lara would end up happily walking into the sunset with her man-partner at the end of this film… but NO! She kills him! Ha! Not because she’s a heartless tomb RAIDER, but because she’s so darn concerned about the lives of billions of people. Boo-hoo.

Oh well, I was still pretty jazzed to see an ending the left me not-so-sure-about-what-would-happen in the last ten minutes. So, overall, I give it about 2.8 stars.

[Mike]

I'm with DH on this one. Tomb Raider was a terrible and boring piece of shit! It sucked! I saw it in theaters opening weekend because my brother wanted to see it. We weren't supposed to see it, we were actually supposed to see something else, but then once we got there he decided he wanted to see this, all because some dumb girl said it was really cool. I didn't think it looked that bad though, but I was just going to rent it on video. However, during the whole movie I was bored out of my friggin' mind. The action scenes weren't even exciting. I could care less what was going on and just wanted it to end. What torture it was. I was so pissed at my brother for deciding to see this. Not only was it one of the worst movies of 2001, but it was also the worst movie that I saw released in summer of 2001.

I'm shocked so many people around here are looking forward to this. I keep hearing people saying "I hated the first, but the second looks better and I'm actually excited for it." Yeah, it does look better than the first, but it's not too hard to surpass a steaming pile of shit like that. I still don't think it looks that great, better than the first, but still just OK. There's absolutely no way in hell I would see this in theaters. I will wait for video for sure. Yep, I will check it out on video, but I WILL NOT see it on the big screen. Ever since I saw the first I told myself "I won't fall for this again! I will never see the sequel in theaters." I'm surprised everyone else is actually falling for it, especially people that hated the first.

I just wonder if the people that fall for seeing it in theaters this time end up hating this one too, if they will actually fall for seeing TR3 on the big screen too. I know I won't... I gave the series a chance, but it was way less than impressive, so it doesn't get another chance in theaters from me. I'm not taking the risk of being bored out of my mind again.

[bondish]

I am also one of the select few who enjoyed the original Tomb Raider movie. Ok, it was unrealistic and in many ways stupid, but I enjoyed it, and Angelina Jolie is hot. I rate it 6/10. I will definitely get around to seeing the Cradle of Life. Yet again it looks like over-the-top unrealistic fun, but thats the sorta fun stuff I enjoy. Will definitely see this come September 18th over her in NZ.

[Fisting Ackbar]

The first one blew, and so did Jan de Bont's last two films. The hell with this.

Although my little brother wants to see it...I might actually join him if he pays my ticket.

[Jedi]

Being a huge fan of the game series, the first film gave me almost exactly what I wanted: LARA CROFT in flesh and bones jumping here and there talking nonsense and looking hot. And I loved the first movie for that. I hope this one will have a better story because it won't be enough if it's all about action and from what I saw of trailers and pics, Cradle of Life looks to be way better.

This is, by far, my most anticipated movie of the summer. I know it won't be a classic and it doesn't stand much of a chance in being a box-office hit but I'm really looking forward to seeing it. Especially it's coming out just after the new game, Angel of Darkness which definetly rocked.

[Jedi]

Originally posted by Mike
I'm shocked so many people around here are looking forward to this.

Everyone's entitled to their taste, after all. And the first film managed to make $250M+ worldwide which indicates that there were people who really liked it.

[dh1989]

Originally posted by Jedi
Everyone's entitled to their taste, after all. And the first film managed to make $250M+ worldwide which indicates that there were people who really liked it.

Nah, it justs proves that the game is hugely popular, many people went to see it all over the world because they love game. If the movie had been great, it should've been able to pull in AT LEAST 350 million internationally. This one, after most hated the first, will do much worse, IMO.

[Horror whore]

The first one really blew (4/10).

But this one looks like a major improvement so I'm seeing it. Basically every early review said that this is 10x better than the crappy original, so I'll give it a chance.

[Horror whore]

Here's another early review for the movie from AICN....

Jemma McFatBack here - you've printed sneaky peaks at Red Dragon, 28 Days Later and the masterpiece that refuses to age, The Scorpion King. Well now I've seen Paramount's summer biggie and...

I went in with LOW expectations. Lower than any I can remember having for a movie. The trailer looked kinda fun but the first movie sucked in so many ways I couldn't begin to contemplate them salvaging something decent for the second outing. And Jan De Bont's not made anything worth watching since Speed, but that was one of the best action movies of the 90s, so...

It seems like he just went out to make his own movie, ignore Simon West's misfire - not that there was much to pick up on - and for the most part it's an entertaining ride. Whilst the opening sequence in an underwater temple just SCREAMS backlot, it does get better... but only after a couple of those useless training sequences that plagued the original. Sure, cuts from them may bulk out your trailer but there's no tension, no sense of danger or excitement, no wow factor, no reason for them to be there. Luckily, British Intelligence arrives and the plot gets going.

The whole Temple Of Life/Pandora's Box thing is handled far better than you'd expect from the trailer and whilst the bad-guy is rather silly, he's easy enough to hate. The main thing in the film's favor is Lara's relationship with her partner - insert Scottish guy's name here - because there's uncertainty to the whole thing. Not because they were lovers in the past and will they/won't they get together? But because his character - a disgraced marine - betrayed his men and country to sell a weapon to the highest bidder. And now Lara needs him to help her find a weapon... but will he betray her? It's nicely played and adds a sense of ACTUAL DRAMA to the proceedings. He's also reasonably sexy, which balances the strutting, nipple-erect performance from Jolie.

Meanwhile, some REAL action sequences have kicked into play - ones where, unlike the first movie, people actually get shot and die. And without wanting to sound like a gung-ho idiot, thank god for that... even in "these troubled times" it's still nice to see a bullet-riddled minion tumble squealing from an elevated position. This movie has that and, as soon as we know it's pushing PG-13 that little bit more than the prequel, there's a sense that someone we care for might get hurt. It helps.

There's some nice CGI where it's needed and either invisible or non-existant stuff where it's not (very pleasing), a Raiders-lite artifact-finding conclusion (which also seemed to rip from Labyrinth, which gets it a plus point in my book), at least one cool idea I'd not seen before with those growly things you see in the trailers, and very little of Chris Barrie, the guy from TV's Red Dwarf who irritated audiences worldwide in the first movie. Shame to see Djimon Hounsou reduced to this bit-player role.

To my surprise, then, Cradle Of Life seems to have learned that a decent action movie needs characters that hook you, at least slightly, for whatever reason, and a sense that the (mostly gun-orientated) action isn't just foreplay for a trailer-friendly stunt but actually potentially dangerous.

One point though (if only to prove to people that I've seen it once they have too)... if making an antidote really was THAT easy, I think we'd have a remarkably disease free world.

[dh1989]

There's something else that bugs me about this movie. The final line in the full trailer ---

"Take us to Pandora's Box. It is your destiny to see what is inside."

I loathe it when action/adventure films pull in a crappy 'destiny' line. Why can't she just be a TOMB RAIDER, who goes on a mission to beat her competitors, raid the tomb, steal the artifact, and get filthy rich? Oh no, now everytime she goes on a mission it has to be her 'destiny' to complete it. Let me guess, it'll probably have to do with her dearly departed father and his misadventures. But frankly, I still don't give a shit. I feel it is my destiny to wait for DVD to find out Lara's 'great destiny'. :rolleyes:

[PorcheRacer]

I thought the trailer was terrible but the TV spots are kind of good. My friend wants to see it so were sneaking in after the main event...BAD BOYS II

[movies35]

In Summer 2001 I was a 13 year old who liked these "big summer movies." I walked into Tomb Raider with VERY high expectations at a 12:30pm showing. And I hated it. 4/10 or D+

Then about a week after it did alright at the box office I heard there was going to be a sequel. And I hated the idea. I wasn't excited at all to see this, not even after I saw the trailer. But when I saw some TV spots, and saw the trailer again, this went right up on my list as my most anticipated movies of the summer. But the first looked awesome too, and I don't want to feel cheated and bored if I see "Lara Croft Tomb Raide: Cradle of Life" in the theaters. But, I don't think I will be. Reviews have been great. So I will be seeing this one sometime before it ends it's theater run.

[Jedi]

Originally posted by dh1989
This one, after most hated the first, will do much worse, IMO.

Well, yeah! Most certainly it's not going to make $48M opening weekend like the first did. Maybe not even $30M but if it's really a better film then it could save the whole franchise. I dunno how much the new game will have an effect on fans and would help the film making some good business in box-office terms. Personally I've just started playing it yesterday and it's awsome and it makes me really really looking forward to see the film (though the game is a whole different story and all), but dunno to what extant it will affect people's choice whether to see the film or not..

[sleekproductions]

I'll definately check this film out. I thought that the first one was a decently entertaining film, and Angelina Jolie is tres tres hot. This could prove to be a fun time.

[ColinM]

The only thing the first Tomb Raider (3/10) was good for was jerking off to Angelina Jolie, and since I could get arrested for doing that in a public theater, I think I'll skip Cradle of Life.

[EDsoulsurvive*]

After the first, I dunno if im goin for this. I rememebr that flick looked good too, and i thought i liekd it after i first saw it. Well i got the DVD and hav honeslty never watched it thru again. I'm still ifffy on this, even if it does looks better.

[The Other]

DAMN! There are too many BIG pictures. I don't think we need so many pictures. One or two per new movie thread should be fine!

[Nachokoolaid]

Originally posted by dh1989
There's something else that bugs me about this movie. The final line in the full trailer ---

"Take us to Pandora's Box. It is your destiny to see what is inside."

I loathe it when action/adventure films pull in a crappy 'destiny' line. Why can't she just be a TOMB RAIDER, who goes on a mission to beat her competitors, raid the tomb, steal the artifact, and get filthy rich? Oh no, now everytime she goes on a mission it has to be her 'destiny' to complete it. Let me guess, it'll probably have to do with her dearly departed father and his misadventures. But frankly, I still don't give a shit. I feel it is my destiny to wait for DVD to find out Lara's 'great destiny'. :rolleyes:

I sort of like destiny in movies.
So, dh, you don't think that Harry Potter is destined for greatness in any way, or perhaps John Conner may be destined to lead the human resistance in a victory against the machines? No, that's stupid. There's no such thing as destiny. ;)

[Trinity]

Originally posted by The Other
DAMN! There are too many BIG pictures. I don't think we need so many pictures. One or two per new movie thread should be fine!
There's no such thing as too many pictures of Angelina Jolie.;)

[Jedi]

Originally posted by Trinity
There's no such thing as too many pictures of Angelina Jolie.;)

Yeah! and after Original Sin and Life or Something Like it she really does need a hit. But in a summer when a Charlie's Angels movie is struggling to make $90M I wonder how much Tomb Raider will stand a chance!
I hope it will.

[Mike]

Originally posted by ColinM
The only thing the first Tomb Raider (3/10) was good for was jerking off to Angelina Jolie, and since I could get arrested for doing that in a public theater, I think I'll skip Cradle of Life.

LOL! I don't think the first was even good for that though. ;)

[Horror whore]

Originally posted by Nachokoolaid
I sort of like destiny in movies.
So, dh, you don't think that Harry Potter is destined for greatness in any way, or perhaps John Conner may be destined to lead the human resistance in a victory against the machines? No, that's stupid. There's no such thing as destiny. ;)

I was kind of thinking that too when I read that post. I mean, the whole destiny aspect sure as hell doesn't bother him all the time. In Harry Potter and the Order of the Pheonix SPOILERS Harry finds out it is his "destiny" to either kill Voldemort, or be killed by him. END SPOILERS So I don't really see why the whole destiny thing bothers him about this movie...

[Nate6]

The first one was bad to the point of vomiting...I don't think my $10 will be spent on this shite...

[dh1989]

So, dh, you don't think that Harry Potter is destined for greatness in any way, or perhaps John Conner may be destined to lead the human resistance in a victory against the machines? No, that's stupid. There's no such thing as destiny.

I was kind of thinking that too when I read that post. I mean, the whole destiny aspect sure as hell doesn't bother him all the time. In Harry Potter and the Order of the Pheonix SPOILERS Harry finds out it is his "destiny" to either kill Voldemort, or be killed by him. END SPOILERS So I don't really see why the whole destiny thing bothers him about this movie...

To start, when did I say "whole destiny aspect bothered me all the time?" I find it is used perfectly in the Harry Potter films, and, especially, the Terminator films, along with a few others, but I feel it is entirely lame how the filmmaker chose to introduce it here, judging from the trailers. You see, 'Nachokoolaid', in the two films you gave as examples, the 'destiny' bit has been a running theme through all the films, whereas with Tomb Raider, it seems everytime she goes on a mission, they introduce a new 'destiny' to raise the stakes, and I think that's a cheap filmmaking gimmick.

[Jedi]

Originally posted by Horror whore
I was kind of thinking that too when I read that post. I mean, the whole destiny aspect sure as hell doesn't bother him all the time. In Harry Potter and the Order of the Pheonix SPOILERS Harry finds out it is his "destiny" to either kill Voldemort, or be killed by him. END SPOILERS So I don't really see why the whole destiny thing bothers him about this movie...

I guess the comparsion between Harry Potter and Tomb Raider is a little bit too unfair. I mean, the first is a book and the other is a video-game and they will definetly be dealing with their themes in completely different ways.

[Arathon]

I saw the trailer when I was seeing The Hulk. It doesn't look very good. A real dull looking film to me.

[Jon Lyrik]

Should be retitled: Lara Croft: Tomb Raider-Jolie's Cradle. The director seems obsessed with breasts if the trailer is accurate.

[The Other]

You guys are right, the first one sucked so much ass, but the second doesn't look that bad. I'm not going to go see it in theaters (God no!), but I may rent it 5-6 months down the road, here.

[reciprocity]

Saw Tomb Raider 2 last night at a screening - pretty bummed out.

I really liked the first one. I thought Jolie was very believable as an action herione (not the easiest accomplishment in movies). Her character was a good mix of enigmatic and tough while maintaining her british femininity.

In the second, there is nothing new. In the first, we were introduced to her many varied friends all over the world, and her training programs and her castle home. This movie held no surprises for me. I enjoyed watching it because Angelina Jolie is breathtakingly beautiful and there was lots of eye candy, but I was expecting so much more.

If you want to look at pretty things for a little while (Jolie, great locations across the globe and a very attractive co-star) check it out. If you are expecting something new, or something equal to/better than the first- you may be disappointed.

[Kimmy]

i've seen the first one and i didn't think it was great but not that worse either.
(maybe it's because i can't say a bad word about a movie except gossip stupid movie!!! )


the trailer of the second one looks pretty ok to me

i'm definitly going to rent it!

[Strider]

Originally posted by Jon Lyrik
Should be retitled: Lara Croft: Tomb Raider-Jolie's Cradle. The director seems obsessed with breasts if the trailer is accurate.

Well, as long as their Jolie's breasts, I won't mind - not in the slightest... :D

Strider

[Invincible]

Originally posted by Strider
Well, as long as their Jolie's breasts, I won't mind - not in the slightest... :D


Exactly, nothing wrong with tits :D

[Scarface98.9]

I never saw the original, due to the ass raping the critics gave it, but from the reviews I've read from around the net, and the promising look of the trailers, I'm gonna see it. I see movies every Tuesday, and I'd rather see a sequel with Angelina Jolie rather than a 3D kids movie (Spy Kids 3) or Oscar-bait trash like Seabiscuit

[dh1989]

I suppose I'm the only male here who does not find Angelina Jolie to be extremely "hot."

[movies35]

Originally posted by dh1989
I suppose I'm the only male here who does not find Angelia Jolie to be extremely "hot."

You aren't alone Dh. I don't think she's that "hot" either.

[EDsoulsurvive*]

Originally posted by dh1989
I suppose I'm the only male here who does not find Angelia Jolie to be extremely "hot."
ehhh. it depends. Some shots of her make her look incredibley sexy, but others make her look like a digruntled boy with breast implants...

[DevilMonkey]

Originally posted by dh1989
I suppose I'm the only male here who does not find Angelia Jolie to be extremely "hot."

Jolie looks likes shes been beaten with an ugly stick, she looks like a dog!! I seriously can't find her even okay looking. Still really looking forward to this film.

[dh1989]

Over at Rotten Tomatoes, with 5 reviews counted, Lara Croft Tomb Raider: The Cradle of Life has a positive rating of 60%. Here are two critic quotes, one is positive, the other negative...

"The Cradle of Life is infinitely more fun and feral than its precursor, and it exudes an attitude worthy of the diva that rides it."

- Ed Gonzalez, Slant Magazine

"The film ironically does the opposite of what an archaeologist is supposed to do - it takes a rare and beautiful treasure and buries it under a ton of junk."

- Peter Sobczynski, Critic Doctor

[Moviefreek]

Originally posted by dh1989
I suppose I'm the only male here who does not find Angelina Jolie to be extremely "hot."

and I thouht i was the only one...

[AgentSmith]

LARA CROFT TOMB RAIDER: THE CRADLE OF LIFE / *** (PG-13)

July 25, 2003

Lara Croft: Angelina Jolie
Terry Sheridan: Gerard Butler
Hillary: Chris Barrie
Dr. Jonathan Reiss: Ciaran Hinds
Bryce: Noah Taylor
Kosa: Djimon Hounsou
Sean: Til Schweiger

Paramount Pictures presents a film directed by Jan de Bont. Written by Dean Georgaris. Running time: 116 minutes. Rated PG-13 (for action violence and some sensuality).

BY ROGER EBERT

Not everybody could play Lara Croft. Not everybody would want to, but that's another matter. Rich, humorless, awesomely competent, ambiguous about romance, stacked, she emerges in "Lara Croft Tomb Raider: The Cradle of Life" as once again a heroine too busy saving the world to trouble herself with tomb raiding. In fact, she isn't really a raider at all; the word suggests criminal activities, when perhaps it is only intended to remind us of raiders of lost arks and suchlike.

In "Lara Croft Tomb Raider" (2001), you will recall, she battled the Illuminati in their quest to reunite the halves of a severed triangle in order to control time. In "Lara Croft Tomb Raider: The Cradle of Life," which with becoming modesty is 10 letters shorter than "Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl," she engages in a deadly race for control of Pandora's Box, which brought life to earth but was slammed shut before it could also release a plague that would kill us all. Devout Darwinians will note that if the box was opened to admit life and then immediately closed on death, whoever or whatever came out of it must have evolved with startling speed into a box-closing organism.

Lara Croft is Lady Lara Croft (Angelina Jolie), daughter of the archeologist Sir Richard Croft ("Lost in the Field, 1985"). Actually, since the title insists it has no comma, if grammar means anything she is Lady Lara Croft Tomb Raider. In the somewhat murky chronology she describes early in the film, the original box arrived from outer space, and was discovered by an Egyptian pharaoh in 2300 B.C. "in a place he called the Cradle of Life," she explains to her colleagues, mentioning Pandora's Box. "You mean the Greek myth?" she is asked. "That's the Sunday school version," she says. Only Lara Croft would go to a Sunday school that teaches Greek myth.

Some two centuries later, the box was obtained by Alexander the Great, who hid it in a temple, which was buried beneath the sea by an earthquake, its location revealed as the film opens by another earthquake. Lara is involved in a deadly race against Dr. Jonathan Reiss (Ciaran Hinds) for possession of the box. He wants it in order to wipe out humanity, except for the best and the brightest, of course, after which he will rule, I guess. Lara chooses as her only companion Terry Sheridan (Gerard Butler), and they embark on an adventure that will have them deep-sea diving, leaping from the tops of Shanghai skyscrapers, and fighting it out in Africa.

I describe these details only because this kind of story amuses me, and always has, ever since those long-ago days when I curled up on the sofa with H. Rider Haggard's She. Adventures involving the ancient, the occult and the exotic are much superior to those involving modern cars and guns and cops. A perfect adventure should have at least one magnificent private library somewhere in it and a butler. Also ancient crumbling temples, things that shine real bright and cool costumes.

As it turns out, the location of the Cradle of Life is encoded on the outer surfaces of a glowing sphere that Lara and Terry find in Alexander's undersea temple, which inexplicably remains watertight until midway through their visit, after which it leaks and crumbles admirably. To escape back to the surface, Lara slashes her wrist so the blood will attract a shark, hits the shark in the nose to confuse it, and holds onto its fin as it swims for the top. Now that's a tomb raider.

In a summer where the special effects in movies have grown steadily more repetitive and dreary, "LCTR:TCOL" uses imagination and exciting locations to give the movie the same kind of pulp adventure feeling we get from the Indiana Jones movies. There's an amazing use of giant neon signs in Shanghai, an escape by parasails, a secret lab hidden in a retail mall, a pole-vault to a helicopter, and a perfect scene where the villain, in hot pursuit of Lara, gets into an elevator and then a little brat gets on and punches all of the buttons. I've been waiting for years for that to happen.

Not everybody, I observed, could play Lara Croft. Angelina Jolie can, with a straight face, a dry wit, a fierce resolve and a British accent, which adds a certain style to the enterprise. She's all class, which is why she has friends everywhere, ready to stash parasails on top of skyscrapers, or allow her to parachute into their Land Rovers as they race across the African savanna. Kosa (Djimon Hounsou) is the Masai warrior who's her sidekick in the African section. And Sheridan delivers one of the more sincere romantic lines in recent movies: "You can break my wrist--but I'm still gonna kiss you." She is not, he will discover, very sentimental.

This is a better movie than the first one, more assured, more entertaining. The director is Jan de Bont ("Speed"), who demands a certain logic from his screenwriters, so that although the story is completely preposterous, of course, it is consistent within its own terms. I was relieved to discover I am not tired of movies like this after all. They have to be good, is the thingl.

[Edie0027]

Wow...3 stars by Ebert...well I was planning on seeing it but now I am more satisfied that I will have fun....and yes...I enjoyed the first one....and was looking forward to this.

That and I know I will have to see it anyway b/c my boyfriend thinks she is hot...guess he wouldn't fit in here..but makes me happy that since I have to go its at least getting some good reviews.

[ralph_wiggum]

wow, i hate to break up the love in, but I am kind of looking forward to this film.. I actually think the trailer looks pretty good, and in contrast to some of you here, i think Jolie looks amazing. I have played the games for years, so i guess i have a little loyalty to the films (and yes, i did enjoy the first one). I think it is strange how people love to bash popcorn films these days... at least they are not trying to con you into comint to see this by telling you it is oscar bait... I will check it out this weekend, because i am looking for some time to sit back and enjoy the view, i think tomb raider will be perfect for that

[kinkyfriedman]

The Ebert review is definatly interesting. Rotten Tomatoes is changing as more of the "mainstream" critics give their two cents. I don't know - I RARELY, if ever, listen to critics - basically if I want to see something, I do. (How to Deal being a perfect example).

[Jim H]

Originally posted by Jon Lyrik
Should be retitled: Lara Croft: Tomb Raider-Jolie's Cradle. The director seems obsessed with breasts if the trailer is accurate.

They're just doing the same thing the video games do, only slightly less ridiculous.

http://perso.wanadoo.fr/soleil-levant/image/tomb%20raider%203.jpg

[Jedi]

Ebert's review is great! but how come he says it's a better film than the first and gives it 3 stars? As far as I can remember he gave the first film 3 starts too!

[Jim H]

Originally posted by Jedi
Ebert's review is great! but how come he says it's a better film than the first and gives it 3 stars? As far as I can remember he gave the first film 3 starts too!

It isn't so much superior that it deserves another star.

Take X-men 2 and Spiderman for instance. I give both an 8/10, but I think X-men 2 is a better film.

[Edie0027]

Originally posted by Jedi
Ebert's review is great! but how come he says it's a better film than the first and gives it 3 stars? As far as I can remember he gave the first film 3 starts too!
Haa haa haa..thats funny...but oh well..I will take those 3 stars and go see the movie..but you do have a valid point..

[kinkyfriedman]

See, video game boobs are totally not normal....but AJ's look "videogamey" but real....

I miss Siskal. :( Anyway...I'm going tonight.

[Jim H]

Originally posted by kinkyfriedman
See, video game boobs are totally not normal....but AJ's look "videogamey" but real....

I miss Siskal. :( Anyway...I'm going tonight.

She's a size D, but wears a padded bra in both movies to make it a DD. This was on an interview on Gamespy.com if memory serves. For some reason I never forgot it. :)

[DieHardBruceFan]

Just saw Tomb Raider 2 and I'm shocked to say that I liked the first one better (which isn't saying much).
This sequel was uninspired, lackluster, boring, and I almost walked out (I never do that).
I couldn't pick one scene that I really liked. I love action movies, but I kept rolling my eyes at the absurdity of this movie (the shark, the creatures at the end--what the hell?).

So, sorry to say, as much as I love Angelina, TR 2 sucks.

ALS0--anyone who dares compare either Tomb Raider film to the brilliant Indiana Jones trilogy should be shot!

[Strider]

Originally posted by DieHardBruceFan
ALS0--anyone who dares compare either Tomb Raider film to the brilliant Indiana Jones trilogy should be shot!

Well, there really is no comparison at all. We all know that the original "Tomb Raider" is vastly superior than the "Indiana Jones" films, don't we? :D :D :D

Strider

[ANTBond007]

Well, I saw it. Until the last 10 minutes, I was going to award it a very generous 5/10 (which would still put it ahead of the original). However, the final scene in the Cradle of Life between Lara and Sheridan actually made it seem that maybe one scene in the film was slightly inspired.

And I also think I'm focusing way too much on video games. Did anyone else notice that when Lara uses the Chinese family's TV, the little boy is playing a Wonderswan, and there's a Nintendo GameCube controller on the dresser?

Anyways, 6/10

[Jon Lyrik]

Originally posted by movies35
You aren't alone Dh. I don't think she's that "hot" either.

I agree. Her lips look like they have been pumped like a freaking balloon.

[Jedi]

Any idea if JoBlo is gonna review this one? I can't wait to see what he'd think of it!

[madlad]

the first one was one of the most horrible films i have ever seen. but i liked the sequel...a vast improvement on the first one but i wasnt expecting much so that could have had an effect on my rating

Lara Croft :Tomb Raider :mad: (meaning a bomb)

Lara Croft Tomb Raider: The Cradle of Life :D :D 1/2 out of four

[Fisting Ackbar]

Originally posted by Jon Lyrik
Her lips look like they have been pumped like a freaking balloon.

They're a little weird, but I wouldn't mind having those pressed against my mouth.

Or wrapped around my dick :D

[Ron34]

Originally posted by Fisting Ackbar
They're a little weird, but I wouldn't mind having those pressed against my mouth.

Or wrapped around my dick :D

lmao!!!!

[Nate6]

Hmmm...maybe Ebert is going crazy...;)

[BorderEevilIII]

Jan De Bont did improve the pacing of the movie versus the first one. Not as spectacular as the movie is being penned as thru TV commercial spots but as a person familar w/ the video game and a big fan of Angelina Jolie in the title role, Cradle of Life is a trip worth exploring.

[Fisting Ackbar]

Okay folks, my younger brother actually ended up dragging me to it, and while I must say that it's a slight improvement over the first movie and Jan de Bont's SPEED 2 and THE HAUNTING, it still blows

Reasons why (SPOILERS below):































- Gerard Butler's character was hardly convincing
- Action scenes that were hardly impressive or unnessecary (see the motorcycle ride over the Chinese wall)
- Did the ebola virus that was tested on the guy in the place actually have anything to do with the movie? (considering that it was never mentioned or used again)
- A CGI shark that gets punched in the nose, swims away and then doesn't attack when Jolie is hanging off a small boat?
- CGI monsters looking like the Ents from THE TWO TOWERS coming out of fucking nowhere?
- A one dimensional bad guy that manages to stay alive till the very end for no real reason
- Butler finds out that Jolie's in Kilimanjaro and somehow manages to locate them in the jungle?
- She OPENS the box, then closes it again?

Overall I'd rate it a 4/10

[JoBlo]

Originally posted by Jedi
Any idea if JoBlo is gonna review this one? I can't wait to see what he'd think of it!

4/10

My review should be up on Monday...the film sucks balls.

[Weapon X]

Damn. I was really hoping you'd give it at least a 5, if not a 6/10 at the least, just to show some signs that improvements were made.

Whatever. I'm still going to see it tomorrow, and chances are I'm going to like it, and chances are I'll argue its merits till I'm blue in the mouth, just like the first one. Sorry, but all the bad reviews in the world just aren't gonna sway me on this.

Besides, even Battlefield Earth got some good reviews...right, Joblo? ;)

[myersfan31]

I loved the movie, I thought it was fantastic. It was a great adventure movie, going all around the world, which I liked alot. :D Much better then the first.

http://www.tombraidermovie.com/ticketing/images/review_pop.jpg

[Jedi]

Originally posted by JoBlo
4/10
My review should be up on Monday...the film sucks balls.

Ouch! :eek:
They bubbled a lot about TR2 being a better movie but apparently it's not! Anyways, if it's just "cool" as I thought the first was then I'd love to see it.

[Hannibal21]

Originally posted by JoBlo
4/10

My review should be up on Monday...the film sucks balls.

:eek: Now I'm petrified; it didn't get a high score at Rotten Tomatoes and JoBlo hated it, and I am most likely going to see this today with a couple of my friends, I'm getting prepared for the worst. :(

[Jedi]

Originally posted by Hannibal21
:eek: Now I'm petrified; it didn't get a high score at Rotten Tomatoes and JoBlo hated it, and I am most likely going to see this today with a couple of my friends, I'm getting prepared for the worst. :(

Sometimes low expectations are better. You might end up enjoying it because you thought it would turn out to be HORRIBLE and it might be, after all, a pretty much watchable movie.
Let us know what you think, though.. :)

[Hannibal21]

Originally posted by Jedi
Sometimes low expectations are better. You might end up enjoying it because you thought it would turn out to be HORRIBLE and it might be, after all, a pretty much watchable movie.
Let us know what you think, though.. :)

Guess I'd have to watch it some other day, my friends wanted to see Spy Kids 3-D so I had to see it with them, but I'll see TOMB RAIDER 2 sometime the next week or so, maybe I'll enjoy it. ;)

[The Prowler]

Tomb Raider should be better than the aweful (in my oppinion) LXG. At least it has an experienced director behind the helm. I am one of the few that enjoyed The Haunting. De Bont being an ex cinematographer always has a good eye for stunts and overall appearance of a movie. I actually enjoyed all his movies except for Speed 2. I think his movies are oft scrutinized just like Depalma's. I will probably check this out after seeing SeaBisquit this weekend. I hope it is an improvement over the first entry cause the word inept comes to mind when I think of that movie.

[Horror whore]

TOMB RAIDER: THE CRADLE OF LIFE

http://i.imdb.com/Photos/Ss/0325703/TR2-C1028-12.jpg

Let me start off by saying this: Tomb Raider sucked. I never thought an action movie could be so boring, but that movie was honestly a snore-fest, I gave it a generous D+. One of the only positive aspects about it was Angelina Jolie, who was perfect for the role of Lara Croft. Then, a few months ago, when I saw the trailer for Tomb Raider: The Cradle of Life before The Core I was pleasantly suprised, it actually looked like a much better movie than the original, I was actually looking forward to seeing it. Well, flash forward four months, I went to the theater with suprisingly high expectations for a sequel to a movie I hated so much. My expectations were and weren't met.

Tomb Raider: The Cradle of Life is a much better movie than the first, improving basically everything that was wrong (which was A LOT) with it and actually making a somewhat enjoyable movie. Yet, the it still does have its share of flaws. First off, the one that bothered me the most, this movie just doesn't know who to please and ends up trying way to hard. For the action junkies, they wanted to put as many action scenes in as possible, while a lot of them were hardly "action" scenes, but merely chase scenes without the chasing. For example, Lara and her male sidekick have to find a remote group of Asians to progress the "plot," on their journey, they ride motor bikes and do a few stunts, there is no adventure to this scene, no purpose of having it but to show them doing a few pointless stunts (that, admittedly, do look good). There was no reason for that scene other than to Lara's journey seem cool.

I guess the filmmakers felt that a "romance" which wasn't really a romance at all, just some flirting and the occasional kiss between Lara and Terry Sheridan (her "sidekick" that I mentioned before), was needed, when it really wasn't. The film really could have done without those scenes but I guess they were there to have some scenes to put in the trailers and TV spots that may attract more female viewers. And a video game based movie better please the video game players, right? Sadly yes, the movie was doing fine until it screwed reality and brought in the Lord of the Ring-like "tree-monsters." They were clearly there just to make the video gamers happy and to have another action scene. I was hoping that the movie would just be a straightforward action flick without the weird creatures, my hopes were not met.

Thankfully, not everything about this movie was negative. Once again, I really dug Angelina Jolie as Lara Croft, she is really perfect for the part and she seems to enjoy the character, my only complaint is occasionally her English accent is a little hard to understand. Most of the other characters do a fine job, just no one give a performance that was too rememberable. The director (Jan de Bont) is much more skilled than the director of the first movie (Simon West), he knows how to pull off several scenes that West would have screwed up beyond imagination. While several of the action scenes just turned out to be pointless, a lot of them worked as well. If you get pass the unbelievability of the "tree-monster" attack it really is a really cool sequence in the film. The ending was really good as well, with some cool sets, great lighting, and a suprise that I didn't really see coming, it nearly made me forget about the original all together. This is truly a better movie than the first, which wasn't really a hard task to do. Some really cool action sequences with a great performance from Angelina Jolie and a better story/director than the original make this movie worth watching...... sorta.

C+

[badberry]

Originally posted by JoBlo
4/10

My review should be up on Monday...the film sucks balls.

Ha...I figured as much. I managed to avoid being dragged to this one over the weekend. Is a review even necesary? Personally I think, "the film sucks balls" suffices...:D


Hey, on a more irrelevant note, with this post, I become a Senior Schmoe....Hooray for me! Yeah, ok, nobody cares.

[Nightmare10880]

There were three movies that I was really looking forward to seeing this year Charlie's Angels:Full Throttle, Lara Croft:Tomb Raider: The Cradle of Life and Freddy vs Jason. I wanted to see all three because I'm a fan of the previous installments of their series. I liked CA:FF, but not as much as did the oringinal Charlie's Angels. I really liked the first Tomb Raider (it's around number 28 in top 30 movies) and there while there some things that I really did like out of Tomb Raider 2, it just didn't strike the same cord with as the original did.

Spoilers





Things I liked

Angelina Jolie as Lara Croft (really the best part of either movie)
The horse back riding/shooting gallery scene
Getting to see Lara's emotions (her value of friendship)

Things that looked sort of cool, but made me laugh
The shark punch (oh come on)
The bike scene (the only besides looking cool that it does is show some competitiveness between Lara and Terry)

[BannerXXX]

I got dragged to seeing this movie, and I have to say I had the same reaction to this movie that I did the first Tomb Raider - with all that was happenning I was bored out of my skull.

It was not like there was not action, there was plenty of it. I get the slight relation to the video game with the world hopping (though, I can't put my figure on it, but the video game seems to do it better.) But it was like Conan: The Destroyer, nothing specific you can put your finger on, it was just not exciting enough for me. I didn't want to see this one because I was not impressed at all with the first one, so I went into it with a bias. But I went into Die Harder with a bias against "part II" - and was pleasantly surprised. I went into Forest Gump with a bias (it looked corny on commercials) and was pleasantly surprised. I went into Adams Family Values with a bias (hating the length of the first film) and found it funnier then I thought it would be. But Tomb Raider II ranks right up there with the first one - a whole lot of nothing going on though its supposed to be an action flick.

[Freeway]

I actually liked the movie for what it was. A vast improvement over the original. It had cool scenery that's for sure.

My full review:

Gerard Butler made his feature film debut in the 1997 James Bond film Tomorrow Never Dies in a small role in a naturally big blockbuster of a film. Following that film he went on to appear in such films as the television production Attila, as the titular character in Wes Craven’s Dracula 2000, and a fairly large role in the 2002 post-apocalyptic actioner Reign of Fire which performed disappointingly at the box office during a time of immense competition which befits the summer movie season. Now he appears in the second film based upon the popular video game franchise, the laboriously titled Lara Croft: Tomb Raider: The Cradle of Life.

It was almost a clear sweep of popular opinion that the first Tomb Raider film was a needlessly slow-moving and generally boring attempt at an action film in the vein of Indiana Jones. As a result, the producers of The Cradle of Life decided that it was best to hire a new screenwriter and a new director as an attempt to rejuvenate what they hope will be a successful franchise of films for years to come. Does all of their retooling make for a better tomb raiding adventure or is this attempt at a franchise doomed to be buried after this outing?

It must be said right off the bat that this second Tomb Raider film is miles ahead of the original in terms of plot and entertainment value. This time the plot has Lara attempting to stop a group of bioterrorists from using an ancient orb to unlock the legendary powers of Pandora’s box. From this serviceable plot the film incorporates many fun action sequences with an underwater scene early in the film amazing to behold in its beauty, a feat considering that it would be hard for most anyone to recall a single scene from the first film. Director Jan De Bont (Speed, The Haunting) keeps the film moving and rather interesting most of the time with only a few moments of the film seeming superfluous.

The acting for the film is fine for this type of film with Angelina Jolie fitting her role as Lara Croft perfectly. Gerard Butler has the charisma to make his role fun and altogether entertaining. The secondary actors also are fine; doing the best with what little screen time they are given.

Overall, the second Tomb Raider film is not only a vast improvement over the below average original, it is a very fun action film in its own right.

7.5/10

[Alecc Bracero]

I was worried that Tomb Raider 2 was going to dominate the box office with a $40 million plus opening, considering the way crappy movies open these days, but I was very happy when it opened at number four! The first one was definitely one of the most boring films ever, right up there with The English Patient. The fact that Tomb Raider 2 cost around $90 million and it only made a little over $20 million this weekend, means that it will probably top out at around $60 million if it is lucky in this crowded summer. What that means is that any chances for another Tomb Raider Crapfest to be made has officially been put to sleep. America, I am proud of you. Now we can all dance in the streets and hope that Jan De Bont crawls back into that hole he's been hiding in. MAH!!!!!

[Kaos]

How's this for amusing?

From IMDB.com

'Tomb Raider' Video Game Blamed for Film Failure


Disappointed movie bosses are pointing the finger of blame at video game Tomb Raider - Cradle Of Life after the Angelina Jolie-starring sequel of the same name bombed at the box office. Executives at Paramount were left stunned when the much-hyped action movie took only $21.8 million on its first weekend at the American box office, less than half of what the original installment bagged in the same time frame. And they cite the critical mauling given to the latest computer game as the reason cinema goers are deserting the archeological franchise. Paramount's Wayne Lewellen says, "The only thing we can attribute to is that gamers were not happy with the latest version of the video game."


Gee, you don't think it had anything to do with the fact that the movie SUCKED, do you?:rolleyes:

[Strider]

Tomb Raider: The Cradle of Life (2003)

Rated PG-13 for Action Violence and Some Sensuality

Director: Jan de Bont

Starring Angelina Jolie, Gerard Butler, Ciaran Hinds, Noah Taylor, Christopher Barrie, and Djimon Hounsou.

http://i.imdb.com/Photos/Ss/0325703/TR2-C1028-12.jpg

Synopsis: "Achaeologist and explorer extrodinaire, Lara Croft (Angelina Jolie) journeys to a sunken underwater temple that leads to a sphere that contains the mythical Pandora's Box, but to only have it stolen from her by the leader of a Chinese crime syndicate, who's in league with a man named Reiss (Ciaran Hinds) who wants to use the Box as a doomsday weapon. Facing her greatest challenges yet, the tomb raider pursues both men, in order to get her hands back on Pandora's Box, and save the world and entire human race".

When the first "Tomb Raider" was released two summer's ago in 2001, it was destroyed by all critics and it seemed there were only very few movie-goers who enjoyed the film. I am part of the select minority who did enjoy the original film, it was stupid, unrealistic, implausible, but still good fun. Two years later, a sequel with the title of "Tomb Raider: The Cradle of Life" has arrived in theaters. As for the film, it's quite different than it's predecessor - you'll have to wait to discover if that's a good or bad thing, I'm afraid.

Angelina Jolie returns for a second time as Lara Croft, the beautiful explorer and adventurer who has charm, wit, strength, and charisma. In this sequel, Jolie proves once again (just as in the original) that she was the perfect choice to play this video-game vixen. Unlike in the original, Jolie's "Lara Croft" is more serious this time around, but she still is charming and quite humourous.

Alongside Jolie, there's a few other supporting actors. The first of which is Gerard Butler who plays an ex-lover of Lara Croft, and of course, there's a romance between the two. Alas, the romance between Jolie and Butler's characters is completely uninteresting, it actually felt like this "romance" was added just for pure kicks. For some reason, it just didn't feel necessary, it would've been much better if Jolie had been left by herself instead. Also, there's Ciaran Hinds as "Johnathan Reiss", who would be the film's main villian. His character is so incredibly dull, and if you think about it, he's basically an exact clone of the villian in the first film. Lastly, there's Noah Taylor and Christopher Barrie who return as Lara Croft's computer whiz and butler, and both are unfortunately wasted. Both actors were a key part of the original's humor, but in this sequel, they're hardly anywhere to be seen.

The only noticable problem in "Tomb Raider: The Cradle of Life" is quite a problem indeed and it brings down the film. That would be (and I'm sure many will agree) the film's overall flow and pace, which is very slow considering this is a large-scale action/adventure film. At times, nothing of any interest or importance occurs in the film, and it can be a drag and rather dull as well. Yes, there is some actual entertainment to be found here, but it still has a fair share of sheer boredom.

My expectations for "Tomb Raider: The Cradle of Life" weren't very high in the first place, but I had some hope that new director Jan de Bont, who has directed such entertaining and thrilling films as "Speed" and "Twister" would turn this sequel into a more fun and superior film. Unfortunately, that failed to happen. "Tomb Raider: The Cradle of Life" isn't a bad film, but it lacks the energy, the quick pace, and the fun-filled spirit of it's predecessor. Besides last month's "The Hulk", this sequel would be the second biggest disappointment of the summer.

Running Time: 1 hour 48 minutes

Grade: 5/10 or ** 1/2 out of ***** stars

Strider

[Septicfish]

Originally posted by bondish
I am also one of the select few who enjoyed the original Tomb Raider movie. Ok, it was unrealistic and in many ways stupid, but I enjoyed it, and Angelina Jolie is hot. I rate it 6/10. I will definitely get around to seeing the Cradle of Life. Yet again it looks like over-the-top unrealistic fun, but thats the sorta fun stuff I enjoy. Will definitely see this come September 18th over her in NZ.

Agreed!

Besides, Angelina Jolie's Fit.... I'll definately be watchin' this flick when it enters the cinemas over here. The first one was quite good aswell, IMO. Oh well... ...:D

[DevilMonkey]

I saw this 2 days ago and it rocked! 9/10!

[optimus1]

Jedi will be happy to hear this from you :P

[EDsoulsurvive*]

saw the first half of this movie today and pretty much liked what i saw, I might go back tomorro to check it out if I can't get into American Wedding.

[Jedi]

Originally posted by optimus1
Jedi will be happy to hear this from you :P

It's a little bit late reply but...yeah! I'm actually VERY happy that there are people who actually liked it. Managed to see it yesterday and yes it ROCKED. Here's my review: :)

Lara Croft- Tomb Raider: The Cradle of Life
8/10

So, the first film was bad. Not in my opinion, though. I thought the first Tomb Raider movie to be a fair introduction to the character and world of Lara Croft. Despite a very weak story and a corny father-daughter subplot, that film had some fantastic sets and well-executed action sequences and most of all it had Lara Croft in the shape of Angelina Jolie and that was more than enough for fans of the action game to be satisfied. Critics, on the other hand, were over-reacting in a horrible way over the shallowness of the film never capable of remembering on what source the first film was based and for what purpose it was made in the first place. Now audiences are already sick of the reputation of the first one (thanks to heavy internet buzz) so expectations were very low..

But the film exceeded even my expectations and for a moment I thought that Cradle of Life should’ve been the first film in the franchise. Delivering an engaging story with some excellent action scenes. This film was more faithful to the game; the underwater temple scene in the beginning of the film made me feel that I’m watching a movie-cut from one of the games. Same goes to the final reel taking place in “the cradle of life”. And all through the film, its makers managed to make Lara look so much as fans are used to her while playing the game. Some of the other virtues of the films are the fantastic sets and beautiful exotic places we get to see through Lara’s adventure. Also I liked a lot how we got to see the involvement of her friends in what she does. And having a companion in Terry Sheridan (Gerard Butler) made the film look less Croft-centered and more of an action adventure led by her. The underwater temple.. The fight in Shanghai and the cradle-set parts of the film were FANTASTIC. And I guess that you don't have to be a devoted fan of the game (like myself :p ) to enjoy it.

But the film isn’t flawless either. The way Lara and Terry escape from every situation they got stuck in becomes kinda predictable and lessened my engagement in some of the action scenes because I was pretty sure no matter how bad it would get they’ll manage to get away from it in a few minutes. And the way the film ended the relationship between Lara and Terry sucked big time. It was surprising but definitely unnecessary and was made to add a schmaltzy “heroic” dimension in Lara’s character but it failed. But just like the game: you focus on Lara, the action and the sets and almost forget about anything else.

Anyways, like the first film this is no groundbreaking cinema by any means. But it is very solid entertainment for summer movie-goers. Angelina Jolie’s efforts force you to admire how much she’s got involved with this character and there are plenty of eye-candy and action for movie fans and LOTS of Lara Croft for fans of the game. It’s a shame Cradle of Life is doing way less-than-expected business at the box-office in a year when Daddy Day Care, Daredevil and the mentally challenged Charlie’s Angels rule.

[ilovemovies]

I liked it too. I'm too lazy to write a review right now but it was definately a MAJOR improvement on the first film. Who'd a thunk that the sequal to the worst film of the summer of 2001 would be one of the better movies of the summer of 2003? Certainly not me. And unlike in the first film where she was as dull and boring as the film itself, Angelina Jolie rocked in this movie. Unlike in the first film where she gave a performance devoid any kind of joy, she actually appears to be having a good time here. I think the main contributor to the fact that this movie is FAR better than the first is that Jan De Bont is a much better director than Simon West.

* * * ( out of * * * * )

[psycho path]

This film was pretty good. 6 and a half outta 10. The shark was pretty bad, and the creatures at the end sucked. Without them, it would be an 8/10.