Tomb Raider Roar Uthaug and the curse of the cine-games
Entered the room with the awareness of having yet to recover from the horrible experience in January of 2017 with the worst Assassin's Creed, Justin Kurzel (from which, paradoxically, we expected it could do well after the evocative and poetic Macbeth), I realized that they were actually three concerns that had brought me to approcciarmi to the new Tomb Raider with very low expectations.
One: Lara Croft had already been shown to have a very bad feeling with the seventh art, not once but twice already, at the beginning of the millennium, first with the wo Lara Croft: Tomb Raider by Simon West in 2001 and then two years later with the indecent and/or incredible (in the sense that it is really amazing that they have had the courage to produce it after seeing as it lacks the first film) Tomb Raider: The Cradle of Life Jan De Bont.
Two: perhaps because he still upset by the lack of visual and stupidity of the screenplay for Assassin's Creed, I continued to wonder, why Alicia Vikander (the wife of Michael Fassbender) was made to involve the project of the Norwegian Roar Uthaug rather than make the most of the errors of the husband.
But, most importantly, three: the attempts to bring video games to cinema are always results to better is little more than mediocre, and at worst, terrible.
And so, while my sympathetic accompanist played convulsively with the cap of the bottle of coca-cola, adopting the same enthusiasm of those who would have wanted to be in any other place in the world rather than in the movie room dedicated to the new Tomb Raider, for the first forty minutes, I found myself thinking that, yes, my three greatest fears were proven well-founded.
However. All of a sudden. You. Check a however.
Because, just like the recent Black Panther by Ryan Coogler, even in Tomb Raider there is a precise moment when the film changes gears, it roars (the name of the director, Roar, rest means roar in English) in a high-pitched, that made me jump on the chair, capturing my interest.
We already failed with Lara (in one of the worst shipwrecks in the history of cinema, a headache accompanied by a CGI inexplicably poor for a film with a budget from $ 94 million) and the protagonist is on the run from the bad guys. Taken by surprise by one of them, she is forced to engage in a duel to the body-to-body with the possessed person to round, taller than she, more muscular than her, stronger than her. But Lara manages to get the better, in that scene, well choreographed and surprisingly almost-very-raw (or at least much more raw than the first to evolve a 50-minute films could have predicted).
And if theoretically, there should be no sense that a little of 1.66 m has the better of a mercenary, angry, armed, and (one imagines) to be adequately trained, in practice, however, it is precisely here that the movie starts to ends meet: women are the most enterprising of men, more resistant, more caparbie; women win over men, that are stupid (the batting of Lara: “some men are fools”) and are worth a lot less of the fairer sex (beat of the father of Lara: “You're worth ten of me”).
Therefore, Lara wins. In spite of a plot trivial, which follows slavishly Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade (there were the nazis, here there is an organisation that wants to rule the world; there, the protagonist and the antagonist chased a notebook, here a notebook is at the centre of the story; the relationship father-son conflict between Sean Connery and Harrison Ford becomes a father-daughter between Dominic West and Vikander; there are also three tests to pass to get to the holy Grail), in spite of a host of characters one-dimensional and cliché of the adventure genre, in spite of a CGI from slaps on the face, a soundtrack that will be forgotten twenty-nine seconds after firing the last note, and despite the ultra-dated the use of flashback in that annoying “sort of white and black and is used to distinguish them from the sequences set in the present, because otherwise the kids who are watching the film with an eye to the screen of the mobile phone does not realize the temporal change” (in the last scene, even, and this has made me sbellicare laughter, a flashback goes to latch on with a scene view forty seconds before, that is a bit the equivalent of the death of narrative cinema).
Lara, however, wins because Alicia Vikander is convincing in the part, oozes grit from every pore sweaty and dirty with blood and mud, and we believed until the end, until the last frame. The fact that this is a film that alternates between the mediocre and the decent, is still considered as the best movie games of recent years (maybe always) doesn't that show how video games should stay away from the desks of hollywood producers and therefore from the cinemas.
This probably will not happen, but at least the thought of a Tomb Raider 2 is not so terrible.
Tomb Raider Roar Uthaug and the curse of the cine-games, is of MangaForever.net