User reviews

"Tomb Raider" is a harmless diversion that should please its core audience. I loved the performance of Angelina Jolie, who brings the computer game heroine Lara Croft to life. I watched an interview with Jolie in which she said that she really "became Lara Croft".

With her mock British accent, Jolie is a lot of fun as the adventurer-archaeologist who is equal parts Bruce Wayne and Indiana Jones, but with a much better body.

Taking its cue from the video game, the film's screenplay is more of a puzzle than a plot. The script is a patchwork of ideas that plays like a Greatest Hits collection of other films. It deals with end of the world stuff, but it never feels apocalyptic. It's controlled chaos, utterly lacking in surprise. The script jumps from one expected moment to the next, never apologizing for its lack of originality.

At least Jolie understands the limitations of the script. There's enough conviction in her performance to make you want to believe in Lara Croft, the spunky heiress is who is equally at home in her spacious mansion or within the catacombs of a lost tomb. She's guided by the spirit (both literally and figuratively) of her late adventurer father, Lord Croft (Jon Voight), and assisted by an archaeologist Alex West (Daniel Craig) and cyber-geek creator Bryce (Noah Taylor).

The film opens like "Raiders of the Lost Ark," with Lara Croft deep inside one of those musty, dusty tombs. Instead of outrunning a giant boulder, Croft squares off against a mechanical monster, a robotic menace that seems to come out of nowhere. It doesn't. We learn that it's a creation of Bryce, used to keep Croft on her toes.

Angelina Jolie made the perfect Lara Croft; her facial expressions and sly smirks added a personality to the flick that I can only imagine the video game is missing. She seemed smart, brave, and composed as well as full of emotion. Okay, maybe the parts with her father (real-life papa Jon Voight) were a little over the top, but since the whole movie is just eye-candy anyway they seemed to fit.

The fight scenes among ruins got me. How can you not love Lara Croft jumping onto a swinging obelisk to smash a glass eye that holds the key to time, or sledding thru an ice cave being pulled by dogs? Or the scene where the villains jump through her castle windows as she rappels around the walls, smashing chandeliers and pistol-whipping bad guys? What's a girl to do but hop on her motorbike, take a guy out sideways, and race off at 100 miles an hour? Excellent.

I am not here to defend any plot snags this film might have. I however thought it would be cool to come here and say that I liked this movie. It was quite entertaining. Maybe not always "riveting" but fun action cheese nonetheless. Jolie brought a computer woman to life well and the movie is a good rental, maybe even an unpopular purchase.

I gave it 7/10 stars.

What a great actress she is! I love world culture so this movie lived up to that, unfortunately the dialog/plot was sticky and predictable- Angie is capable of so much more. She carried this movie on her back and pulled the stunts off with gusto and grace(I want a bungee exercise room!). She is a great heroine. I am inspired to raid tombs myself now, or perhaps help refugees as Angelina does in real life. I hope for a sequel. This movie made me a Jolie fan and I'll see her future films and rent her past ones. Overall, a beautiful film to look at, but doesnt allow the watcher to get completely immersed into Lara's world. I give it a 7...

Take an infinite number of monkeys, give them an infinite number of typewriters and and infinite amount of time and one of them will write Hamlet. Yet it took five monkeys to write this GARBAGE!

An impossibly bad plot with no explanation of what the "Illuminati" intend to do with the infinite power of time once it's in their control. Action sequences shot with such confusion that at several points I was hoping one of the millions of fired bullets would leap out of the screen and put me out of my misery.

A terrible movie and a great disappointment.

Many video game enthusiasts were looking forward to the movie adaptation of the "Tomb Raider" game series. When "Lara Croft: Tomb Raider" was finally released, not all of them were satisfied. But the movie does have its good points. Angelina Jolie takes the lead as Lara Croft, the famed archaeologist/adventurer, woman warrior and gamer's dream girl. She plays the role as if she were meant to be Lara Croft. The movie also boasts some very good visual effects and exciting action. The plot does leave a bit to be desired, though. The ancients may have had deep knowledge about the universe and the planets, but the concept with the planetary alignment was just barely plausible. But, really, with movies like this, it's all about explosions and the star's body. Lara Croft's game might not be for everybody, and the same goes for the movie.

Ever since seeing the greatly hyped sequel to Speed, Speed 2 - Cruise Control I thought Hollywood would ever create a summer that terrible again. I was wrong. Yes, despite that summer movies are made for their popcorn, eye-catching appeal and do you rarely see an academy award nomination other than best sound or visual effects, Tomb Raider has to be the worst summer movie since Speed 2. Where one feature of the movie was lacking (such as the storyline), I looked to another feature of the movie (the action scenes) just to be as disappointed.

To begin with lets begin with the terrible storyline and characters. The storyline lacks in any intensity or danger. Not once did I ever feel that Laura Croft was ever in any danger or even got really that beat up. Other than that scratch on her arm that the Monk's tea healed and a bloody lip. Also the characters where terrible accept for Jolie's. And even then the fake English accent and the bad azz attitude about where ever she just decided to parade through was ridiculous. Indi at least had to sneak around for fear of being caught or killed. Then there is her little buddy who designed all her gizmo's and lived in a trailer thats right out of Charlie's Angels. Oh and that is gizmo, the only cool thing about her "gear" was the backpack that she reloads her guns with. I was hoping for at least a wide range of gizmos and gadgets or something. Who know hand held lanterns with no off switch (remember she had to hide it behind a rock) were so new aged technology. Furthermore who was Powell and who was West? You never know if there was any romantic past or not between West and Croft. All you know is that West is the ever redundant, "In it for the money" character. Also why is Powell so bad, other than being a "lawyer" (Baa Baa Ching....groan, lame overdone joke). But seriously if Powell was to obtain the triangle what was he going to do with it? He never said, other than let Laura see her father. Heck Powell was kind of a nice guy in that aspect. Other than that it just seemed that Powell wanted a little triangle to add to his collection, nothing more. So I never really felt like the rest of the world was ever in any danger. I could have been eating my Frosted Flakes and never of known the difference.

Now for the worst part of the movie the action sequences! COMPLETELY UNORIGINAL!!!!!!! To begin with the action scene in the beginning is straight out of the opening action scenes of Indiana Jones. Next we move to the bungee scene. Here we have a rip off of the pulley scene in the computer room from the first Mission: Impossible. Then we go to the car garage of Crofts's abode. And here we find more James Bond 007 cars than I've ever seen. Not to mention the McGuyver like "drill gun". Then the motorcycle up on one wheel n' all again Mission Impossible but this time the Part 2. Where to next ahh yes the actually original fight scenes that were lame. I never knew fighting a 5000-year-old armed statue could be so easy. Just one good whack to the gut and down they go. What else..... ah yes, the Back to the Future references. I believe I remember Doc Brown telling Marty McFly "Destroy the time machine it brings nothing but trouble, and can bring nothing but evil if to fall into the wrong hands." Now Biff did some damage if I remember correctly. Anyway here we are with Lord Croft telling Laura "Destroy the Triangle it brings nothing but trouble, and can bring nothing but evil if in the wrong hands." You know the whole time I'm thinking why didn't she destroy the one part of the triangle in the first place. The Aluminate would just be running around looking for the other piece of a triangle. Not knowing that Laura had already destroyed the other half. Bada bing, movie over. BUT NO, being led out of the ice cavern by the team of dogs. Hmmmm again I think of Indi being dragged behind the Nazi truck by his whip.

I'm sorry if you have found my rantings offensive if you really liked the movie that much. I am aware that this is a summer movie, but as far as summer movies go this ranks down there with Speed 2. This movie is just plain terrible! I didn't find anything really that interesting or exciting about it. It's a movie that I left feeling like I've seen hundreds of times before. At least this wasn't as bad as Speed 2, but it's the worst one I've seen since it. I'm dreading the sequel, I don't know why Paramount is going to want to make another installment, but hey sometimes you get lucky. That is if you have better writers, director, and actors. Video game movies should stay where they belong in my opinion, on our televisions and PC's. I was hoping that perhaps this time they could make something out of it, I've been let down again. Although that Final Fantasy might be good..... lets hope for Video game movie's sake.

Tomb Raider - (1.5/10)

Like Mr. Schwarzenegger is the one and only Conan (+Terminator) and Peter Sellers the one and only Inspector Clouseau, Angelina Jolie embodies Lara Croft to the day. Yes, both movies (Lara Croft Tomb Raider: The Cradle of Life)) are far from perfect but at least they tried to capture the spirit of the games - character- and story-wise. Alicia Vikander may be a good looking woman and a decent actor but she is in no way Lara Croft (that "modernized" Lara is just plain terrible). Anyway, as most movie adaptions of games are rather total fails or subpar, both Tomb Raider movies starring Angelina are solid adventure and action food.

I was really sad by how awful Tomb Raider was... there was no excuse for it to have been so bad. Angelina was PERFECT for the role of Laura Croft, but the astonishingly bad plot, script and direction destroyed a movie with at least moderate potential. I think monkeys could have brainstormed a better storyline than that which we were presented.

I don't know why the ratings for Jolies Tomb Raider movies are so low. The story may be a bit cheesy but so were the games. Angelina's performance as Lara is perfect. Love rewatching this from time to time. Fun movie. I think after the new adaption 2018 tomb raider movie maybe gamers and fans of Lara will appreciate Jolies Tomb Raider a lot more.

Ok, Tomb Raider may not be the greatest action film I have seen but it still is a quite good movie. Although it has borrowed the elements from Indiana Jones -films and its story is very flimsy, Tomb Raider was a fast-moving and enjoyable picture which has a great and striking action scenes. The best thing in a whole movie was of course Angelina Jolie. She did a great work as Lara, not only portraying her as a

hard-boiled fighter but also a sensitive woman. So, although movie is typical and imperfect, it is watchable especially for Jolie and

action sequences.

When movies get made from other forms of media (i.e. video games, comics, books, etc), a clear goal should be established: Make a film that will appeal to both fans of the original source, and that will not completely alienate new viewers. This has been done with some consistencey in the past, "Tomb Raider" does not fall into this category.

If I took the time to list all the things that were wrong with the movie in relation to the video game, I would be sitting here three days, so I will try to summarize what was accurate. Her name was Lara Croft, she did some tomb raiding, she was british. That about covers it.

The plot was horendous, boring, predictable, and generally pointless. These phrases could also be used to describe most of the characters and their acting, I'm not sure whether to blame them or the director on that note. Though I have seen most of the actors give far better performances. I kept thinking to myself, why didn't they just use the plot from the first game, it would have translated well to the big screen, or at the very least found some writers who could, you know, write.

The action sequences were tolerable, I will give it that, though after a while they got a bit tiring and I lost count as to how many times Lara defies the laws of physics, I guess that's a bit consistant with the games, at any rate.

Lastly this movie pandered to the worst thing about the Tomb Raider franchise. Lara Croft's breasts. Yes, i know, she's attractive, she has breasts that defie gravity and a few other physical constants, but please, get over it, if this is the most interesting part of the Tomb Raider sage, just turn the game into a lame porno flick and get on with your lives, it's not worth wasting our time with bad writing and dialogue just so angelina jolie can flash her breasts to the camera some six hundred times in the span of two hours.

To conclude: As a Tomb Raider fan, this movie made me ill and I feel I wasted six bucks and a quarter on it. If you're interested in action, rent something with better acting, or play the games, if you're interested in boobs, the adult section is usually to the back of the video store.

I don't play video games, had never heard of Tomb Raider. I stumbled across this film on cable and absolutely loved it!

The person writing this usually tends to like movie classics and classical actresses. Rarely do I enjoy action films. This one is an exception.

Angelina Jolie is spectacularly fit, and in top acting form for this physically demanding role. I admit that I like the multi-talented Jolie. I found her to be a very believable Lady Lara Croft. Her acting, stunts (which she did most of herself), and her wonderful diction with a British accent, were a true delight. I watched this movie on cable at least ten times before I did something very, very rare for me: I purchased the DVD. Barring this film, the ONLY pre-recorded movies I own are classics.

The plot may be a bit on the thin side. It is, afterall, designed *after* a video game. Another thing I enjoyed about the film was the fact that while there was a great deal of violence, there was no unnecessary gore or vulgar language - read: buggar vs. what it could be.

I have to highly recommend this film for anyone who enjoys pure escapism at it's best! My 75 year old mother liked the movie, and she has very good taste when film is involved.

The film talks upon Lara Croft (Angelina Jolie), an explosive and sexy British archaeologist and it results to be an adaptation from a successful and famous video game . Lara musts discover and destroy halves-objects of an old relic which can control time and a nasty (Iain Glen) also wants to obtain it with the aim to ruling the time . Lara Croft is helped by an adventurer (Daniel Craig , future James Bond) and by two sympathetic underlings (Noah Taylor and Christopher Barrie). Her dead father (John Voight, like on the real life) will give up clues to find it . She'll have to take on several risks , dangers and adventures until reach her aim.

The picture mingles suspense , tension , skydiving , action-packed , pursuits and a little bit of violence when the quarrel happen but it's a very amusing movie . It's a real and typical action film : Running men while are shooting , continuous struggles in bounds and leaps and interminable runs . It's a run-of-the-mill action picture , as from the beginning to the end , the unstopped action and the fast movement is varied . Besides , there are breathtaking outdoors from different countries around the world where the protagonists are traveling to resolve the issues . The final duel amongst the starring and contenders for the possession of the ancient relics is impressive and groundbreaking . The film is similar to the posterior :¨ the cradle of the life¨ , it has a likeness chum (Daniel Craig-Gerard Butler), equal performers (Noah Taylor and Chris Barrie ) with gorgeous as well as spectacular scenarios . However , the first part achieved a lot of box office and second part (directed by Jan De Bont) attained limited success because the storyline was basically a rehash of the original film . Peter Menzies cinematography is awesome like is marvelously reflected on the extraordinary outdoors and Graeme Revell musical score is jolly and lively . The picture was rightly directed by Simon West.

I'll be honest with you here, I hadn't even heard of Angelina Jolie until my brother gave me his copy of this DVD having abandoned it during some of the early scenes.

By this time I was already playing and enjoying the early games - notably TR II before I played the original and progressed to TR III in that order.

TR II was a masterpiece in terms of gaming. It was vibrant and diverse, covering many locations - most notably Venice and China, locations that were covered in the two Jolie movies combined to my recollection, among others.

In order to play the heroine, Jolie had to gain muscle and play the games - in essence she had to BECOME Lara Croft. She had to absorb the quirky traits of this steadfast character in order to deliver an accurate portrayal to fans of the games ("Raiders" as we call ourselves). Jolie performed many of her own stunts to her credit and was on a high protein diet in order to bulk up to the athletic standard required.

The only thing that lets this movie down is arguably the dialogue in spite of a very touching scene between Jolie and Voight - her then real- life estranged father. It was the pain of their real-life situation that oozed through the screen with a sense of great sadness. Jolie's accent was flawless but I feel the dialogue could have been less twee in parts.

The reason my older brother abandoned the movie was due to a rather reality-suspending scene of an ambush in Croft Manor. Character Lara was engaged in some form of indoor bungee exercise wearing some sort of satin pyjama set yet, initially unarmed, managed to single-handedly take out an entire SWAT team with her cunning and athletic prowess, only managing to tool-up when she snatches a weapon from one of her bungee- captives.

If you are happy to suspend belief then your kids will enjoy it. The sequel is more Bond-like however and a more believable movie. Nice to see a younger Daniel Craig in this debut TR film though!

I've watched this movie around five times in total now and every time feels like the first, it's a lot of fun. The ludicrous plot about the planets aligning always surprises me that's what the writers went with, as opposed to you know, raiding tombs?

I watched the special features on the blu-ray and saw one of the creators make a statement that the film wasn't at all "cheesy, corny or camp" - did this guy watch the same version I did? The film is all of those things, from the opening scene in which Lara fights a training robot to then insert a mix-tape cassette, Lara's padded pointy breasts, and not forgetting the film ends on a freeze frame shot of Lara holding her guns - yeah not at all...

If somehow you've never seen this film until today, don't take it at all seriously or you won't enjoy it, just switch your brain off and you'll likely get something out of it.

If you should not see some movies even if "they" paid you, for this one you should go even further and pay money to avoid it! Tomb Raider is grotesque parody of a movie, a gross insult thrown to the moviegoers across the world. Action movies are bad nowadays, but Tomb Raider beats everything by its stupidity. There is nothing that could justify such a failure. At least the industry is true to its style and proves that video-to-movie schemes never work (Street Fighter, anyone? Or Wing Commander? At least the last one came with a Star Wars preview). Anyway, back to the Tomb Raider, the plot is non-existent, the actors are flat, the word "acting" cannot be associated to this production, the fighting scenes are ridiculous. People, The Matrix was The Matrix, no need to endlessly rip it off, you can't just reproduce it! Even the "russian" girl was speaking a terrible russian... could not they hire a real? Conclusion: Run screaming! Or do yourself a favor and see "Return of the Mummy" (silly, yet entertaining).

When I first watches this movie, I'm not sure why I didn't enjoy it. It could be just that I was in the wrong mood. However, I did find the movie lacking a convincing villain challenging enough to make you root for the heroine. Indiana Jones had a good villain, Jackie Chan movies always pit him against the odds - that's what makes for good action. In Tomb Raider, not only is it clear to everyone that Lara Croft is greater than the villains by a long shot, worse still - she joins forces with them! This creates a confusing scenario where natural sympathies for the main character get thrown out the window.

However when I watched it the second time, this time without any preconceived notions and fully expecting the lack of exciting odds, I really enjoyed it for what it is - a visually appealing film with some thrilling stunts and action scenes. The fact that Angelina did her own stunts adds to the enjoyability of the key action scenes, all of which are artfully conceived and executed.

I realize many people toast this movie, but watch the movie for what it offers - some unique and stylish action. The heroine certainly does some nifty tricks that we've never seen on the big screen before, let alone from a female character.

Lord God and all dieties of the universe, how could you let such a film exist? Is man truly without guidance and nothing more than a selfish and foolish creature? Surely no wise being responsible for this thing called humanity could let us sink so low as to create an abyss of wretchedness like "Tomb Raider." In this accursed summer of abuses, this dark age of cinema where the masses flock to see the next corporate manifested piece of garbage, "Tomb Raider" continues to prove audiences will take a big bite from a rotten, festering sandwich, and not only not complain, but say 'thank you' and ask for more.

So-called future star Angelina Jolie takes front stage in her first big-budget starring vehicle and promptly falls asleep on camera. Her faux British accent barely rises above a whisper. She's left shooting her pistols repeatedly, while yearning for her long lost Daddums and nothing more. Jon Voight appears as the Dad, apparently slumming, even for him.

The plot, use that term loosely, involves a magic triangle that controls time. Yes, it is as stupid as it sounds. This hookum acts as little more than a famework to hang actions scenes on. The film starts by introducing us to a large set, then promptly destroys it in a hail of gunfire and chaos. Repeat 4 times, fade out. The special effects in these sequences are largely obvious and bland, the set design familiar of other, better films, and the action itself boring and pointless. Making matters worse are the dullest villans imaginable. I kid you not, the main villan spends most of his screen time recieveing a massage. The rest of the cast is indistinguishable and forgettable.

Paramount is already threatening a sequel to this plague. If the theory holds true that sequels are unavoidably worse than the original, the sequel to "Tomb Raider" may cause internal bleeding, emotional distress and could concieveibly cause irreversable brain damage. Be warned.

This is a classic entertainment action flick. If you're expecting deep revelations to life, you won't get it. If you want great entertainment in what I'd say is what the majority of summer action flicks strive for - then Tomb Raider is just awesome.

I'm genuinely surprised that the rating for this movie is so low. Tomb Raider is one of the movies that I'll occasionally throw on when I just feel like watching a good action flick circa Mission Impossible. It's entertaining, it's pretty smart, and it's a clever adaptation of a video game.

I'm also a huge fan of the soundtrack to this movie. The compilation of songs is really great.

LORA CROFT: TOMB RAIDER / (2001) *** (out of four)

By Blake French:

At last, here is a successful screen adaptation from a video game. "Lora Croft: Tomb Raider" takes the plot seriously, and has a lot of fun with it. Unlike the silly "Wing Commander" and incompetent "Mortal Combat," this movie soars with its physical potential. The movie experienced many production complications, therefore I excepted it to symbolize the three tedious years of filmmaking, the director who bailed out, the sexual harassment charges filed, and the 11 screenwriters who couldn't satisfy Paramount Pictures, the bill, and Eidos Interactive, the company that owns the video game. "Lora Croft: Tomb Raider" manages to pull past its problematic filmmaking process and provide audiences with what is expected from this action packed extravaganza.

Academy Award winner Angelina Jolie portrays Lora Croft, who is a cross between Indiana Jones and James Bond. The role of Croft was not an easy accomplishment, even for Jolie. She endured great physical hardships during the shooting, including injuries to her knee, foot, and shoulder. It's a good thing that Jolie did the film, however, she's probably the only actress with the capabilities and physical appearance to handle such a role. Elizabeth Hurley, Sandra Bullock, Denise Richards, Ashley Judd, and Jennifer Love Hewitt were also among the actresses considered for the role. Any of those fine performers would have brought their own charm and delight to the role, but Croft feels perfect for Jolie.

The disposable premise is not just a clothesline for various action sequences. It stands alone as a needlessly complicated plot contraption concocted out of desperation and deadlines. I am glad the actors took it so seriously; this material begs for parody. Lora Croft discovers a key-based clock unidentifiable even by an antique dealer. Meanwhile, a ruthless member of a powerful society named Manfred Powell (Iain Glen) is waiting for a planetary alignment that occurs once every 5,000 years. This event will give the holder of two separated pieces of a magical stone the power over time itself. Croft and Powell learn that the key will unlock the whereabouts of those missing halves.

The rest of the plot follows the villains and heroes on their journey around the planet, searching for the various artifacts and precious instruments. The film will not disappoint action fans. Suspend disbelief and follow the film's absurd concepts, then the fast-paced action sequences, eye-popping special effects, and convincing sets will satisfy. The outcome of almost every single scene is as obvious as it is predictable, but that doesn't mean we enjoy the scenes any less. There are some exciting action sequences in "Lora Croft: Tomb Raider," although it's easy to become lost in the action; the frequent cuts and camera tricks often interrupt the flow of the action.

"Lora Croft: Tomb Raider" is a fun summer thrill ride. It's not a smart, savvy film, but compared to movies like "The Mummy Returns" it's a wake up call in the midst of a starving summer movie season. If you don't expect more than pointless action, you will get your money's worth.

This film isn't worth a lengthy commentary. Like many current films it possesses remarkable special effects to titillate the tots, and Ms. Jolie is a swell looking woman. For adults who seek good cinema, this film is a silly waste of time.