Tomb Raider, the return (unconvincing) of miss Croft at the movies – Review
It is released yesterday, Thursday, March 15, in theaters across Italy, Tomb Raider, the new film of Norwegian director Roar Uthaug, inspired by the homonymous videogame saga with Alicia Vikander in the role of protagonist Lara Croft.
I do a little introduction is essential before you start the review: I am a big fan of Tomb Raider.
The I cross for the first time in a very small, seeing my cousin play it on his computer, and from then on I have almost never given up, if not just recently.
I'm not a fan of video games. They have very few, almost never use them and I don't own any console of the last generation.
I'm an old dinosaur, you know. They are, however, a fan of Tomb Raider, yes. It is practically the only title that I have almost the entire and that every now and then I enjoy a resume in hand. You know the stereotype of the player that Tex reads only the Tex, and (almost) no other comics? Behold, the one I applied to Tomb Raider and video games.
I have the whole series of exit for the old PlayStation, which is still my favorite (despite the bad Chronicles); I have resisted stoically to the chaotic disaster of Angel of Darkness and I enjoyed the renewed liveliness of the trilogy of Legend, Anniversary and Underworld.
On the following chapters I admit to not be have them than not have it and I have limited myself to try them in the home of friends.
In the light of all these circumstances, overcoming my historical distrust of the movies and video games, I went to the cinema hoping to see at least a movie discreet.
I have been satisfied? Let us say at once: no.
Let's talk about a movie that I was bored and irritated as a few times happened to me at the cinema in recent years. To assess this film we have to keep it under two aspects: as an adaptation of Tomb Raider, and how the film as such.
Evaluation as an adaptation of Tomb Raider: when I learned that co-produce the film would have been the Square-Enix I immediately realized that the film would have been closer to recent versions, instead of the great classics of the saga. And, in fact, it was so.
Forgot the busty adventuress vaguely mature of the saga, the traditional voiced by the legendary Elda Olivieri, here we have a wench of about twenty years (although the actress flights towards thirty), the long-limbed shapes and much smaller than the Lara Croft in the original.
Choice, at least, debatable (at the level of iconography, will be more famous in the Lara traditional than the new one, no?), but the legitimate.
The problem is that, except in a few situations, this film of Tomb Raider has very little, and, above all, contains blunders as big as a house.
First of all, the character of Lara Croft is not in the least respected. Lara should be a rich archaeologist with the ball of the adventure, while in this movie is a girl scapestrata that passes the days doing meetings of MMA and to wander with a band of misfits.
Another thing: in the games Lara accoppa tons of wolves, ferocious lions, bears, tigers, even monsters and dinosaurs. Here of ferocious animals will not see the shadow. A film of Tomb Raider in which Lara Croft does not kill wild animals.
There seems to be a good idea? It will be due to the animal dominant, but this choice made me really turn your nose up at. It would be like to make a film of the Alien without the Xenomorphi.
Also, in the video games, Lara is dried also platoons of enemies with her dual pistols, with the Uzi or with the automatic rifle.
In the film, the double guns appear in the last frame, the Uzis are not there and the use of the automatic rifle are the other characters.
Lara to the maximum use a bow and of the arrows as in the reboot of 2013, which would not be bad if it were not for some years has dominated the cinema a series of films where the protagonist is a young, athletic woman who fights using bow and arrows. I mean, if it was not clear, for the Hunger Games.
To conclude, miss him, Winston, the one and only legendary butler of the Croft manor, the one in the game, you could shoot a thousand times that much not dying.
The last aspect on the adaptation: in the end, Lara is confronted with monsters, creatures, ancient and ancestral, or with human beings mutated.
Here of monsters and there is not even the shadow, not to mention the rest. The esoteric aspect is rationalized (which would not be even a bad, to be clear) and in the final fight, Lara engages in a simple melee combat with an ordinary human being.
It seems the classic speech of the nerd inveterate (and perhaps it is), but if I suggest a movie called Tomb Raider, and then I put all those goodies typical of the series, then you can also create another title.
It must be said that, at least, common pitfalls, such as the blades that sprout from the ground, the floor collapses and the puzzles are there, but alone are not sufficient.
On balance, however, I would have gladly passed over all this if the film as such was of good quality. If he had, that is, a screenplay is sensible, of good interpretations, nice action scenes and if he had been able to excite.
Alas, the film fails on all four points.
The script is based on a scene absolutely no sense, the one in which Lara penetrates into the secret laboratory of his father, a scene that does not stand from any side you look at it, the stuff is so absurd and far-fetched that, I swear, I felt insulted in my intelligence.
I don't want to do spoilers for anyone who takes to watch the movie, so I'm just saying that the whole movie is based on the fact that the father of Lara has not done one thing of vital importance for the world and that it would have been fine to do it alone.
It is not clear? You will understand by watching the film.
The rest is a triumph of maccosa, wtf and the like. I won't pretend that a movie has a script bomb-proof, but at least that makes the side so openly, and so to repeat!
On the interpretations sorvolerei quietly, the actors all have the same expression from the beginning to the end of the film.
Alicia Vikander is completely out of hand, light years away from the classic model of Lara Croft, not at all at ease in the role, and wearing the air what am I doing here?; the villain Voghel played by Walton Goggins, known for his roles in The Shield and The Hateful Eight, is much less charismatic exists on the planet, and has the vacuous stare from the first moment in which it appears, while the only spark of joy is given to us by a sprecatissima Kristin Scott Thomas (by the way, but why did you agree to do this film?).
Even here I will not demand certain tests to be Oscar, but here, we are very, very far below the required standard. Any american comedy is by standing ovation from this point of view.
With regard to the action scenes there is little to say for the simple reason that almost there are none and the few that appear are all made according to the manual of the action.
Zero creativity and zero imagination in short, with the partial exception of the beautiful scene at the beginning of the chase bike for the streets of London.
And the emotions?
You can well understand that here, the encephalogram is flat: the film is called from the first to the last scene and there is not a single shot of the scene that it is one, unless a shot of the scene you intend to what Lara found out in the last few minutes of the movie that any viewer over 12 had already guessed half of the first time.