Rating: 
Summary: Hardcore
Review: This movie is for harcore fans of the Tomb Raider series only. I think that the reason everyone hated this movie so much is because they had no appreciation for the game. Or maybe they did, and the fact that the movie just plain wasn't that good made them not like it. Did that make sense? The lowdown: I only gave this movie 5 stars because I love Angelina Jolie and I love the tomb raider franchise as a whole. I love everything about it. So if you aren't a hardcore fan of the series or you have taste in movies, don't get this one.
Rating: 
Summary: Even Angelina in Skin Tight Tops Can't Help
Review: Yes, though the beautful Angelina Jolie romps through most of the film in skin tight tops staying true to the Lara Croft of Tomb Raider video game fame (with the exception of a wholly unnecessary shower scene), it's not nearly enough to save this horrid mass of dreck. Even the incredible special effects are wasted in a hodge-podge of slice-n-dice editing that makes it impossible for all but those with ADD to follow. The story is senseless and the ending hokey as it comes...Don't waste the money unless you are a die hard fan of the game or Mrs Billy Bob...and really not even then!
Rating:
Summary: great movie!!!
Review: a great movie .one of those i want to watch over and over. i love movies that have strong female charecters , and lora is the queen of strong charecters .i strongley requomend this movie .
Rating:
Summary: One of the worst movies ever....
Review: I've seen hunderds of movies over the years, but this is one of the worst movies I have ever seen in my life. I was bored with plot and the acting wasn't much better. The only positive thing I have to say about this movie was Jolie who looked great during the movie. Other than this avoid this movie at all cost and I regret giving my hard earned money to watch this.
Rating: 
Summary: Could have been better but already is great fun!
Review: I really, really enjoyed this movie, but I think it's one of those films that has to be approached with the right attitude - that is, no great expectations and a forgiving nature. The usual criticisms are levelled at this movie: poor character development, bewildering plot, shoddy editing and a lack of realism, and I have to say that on most counts I agree with the critics. Yes, the characters appear superficial. The plot is spectacularly inane, the editing leaves much to be desired, and there's not the slightest evidence of reality. But if you think about the generic conventions of these kind of archaeologist/superhero movies, the objections shouldn't seem so bad. I mean, firstly the realism thing. The only kind of movies that ought to be grounded in realism are the ones which are limited to the world as we know it. "Tomb Raider" is firmly placed in another kind of world, a world without our limitations, a world where Lara can go anywhere, do anything - like fight re-animated stone monkey soldiers in a bid to win control over time. This last aspect, that of wresting power over time, is the central thesis of the movie. Is this a realistic foundation? No. So what does it matter if unrealistic things happen in this film? They ought to, and do. Secondly, the criticism made about the movie's plot. I think this is one of the biggest disappointments about "Tomb Raider", that the storyline is handled so badly. If you read more about the story (in the book-from-the-movie), you might have some chance of understanding what on earth is going on, but good luck otherwise. I think perhaps the film makers tried to be a little too ambitious: there are so many undercurrents in the plot (eg: Eastern mysticism, Lara's troubled relationship with her past, her ambivalence to ex-flame Alex West, humanity's greed for ultimate power, etc) that to put them all in the one movie comes at the expense of clarity. Simple films are often the best films: the good narratives are those which are strong and cohesive, and pursue one direction - not many! But considering the rumoured plan is to make a trilogy of Lara films, perhaps a flawed first film is inevitable; inexplicable points have to be raised in the first film in order to set the scene for the following sequels. Good editing is the only way to help a convoluted, crowded plot. Let's hope that message gets to the makers of the sequel/s. As for character development, well - same deal as above. Too much in too little a space of time. Motivations aren't explained, for one thing. When Lara is betrayed by an old family friend, the audience is given no help as to what on earth prompts this betrayal. That's just one example, there are plenty of other confusing things. Like Pimms, the sidekick to the villain, what is going on with him? If you read the book you discover he undergoes a change of heart through the narrative, but in the movie you'd never guess that. (The novels based on the movie aren't that great, either, so don't read this as a recommendation to rush out and buy them - although it's worth it if you want to understand this movie more!) Again, the only way to fix these problems is to deal with the narrative/ editing. The acting was fine, but the editing needs a bit of help. Fix the storytelling aspect of a movie and you're halfway to audience gratitude. Yet there are so many positives in this movie! The action is fabulous - awesome awesome fighting sequences, Jolie's portrayal of Lara is superb, there's the intriguing dynamics of Lara's relationship with Alex, and the locations - Cambodia and Iceland - are incredibly beautiful. We've got a strong female in the central role, which is a refreshing change, and there's a brilliant score and soundtrack. And did I mention how fun it is?! Non stop action, got to love that. Granted, those shower scenes of Lara and Alex (separately, of course!) are totally gratuitous to the plot, but I suppose in a movie which is inevitably marketed to the boys that's a hard temptation for film makers to refuse. (They could at least try to refuse, though!) I know a lot of people did not like this movie at all, and that dislike can certainly be justified. But if you don't expect movies to be cinematic masterpieces every time, and if you are prepared to be a little lenient to a well-intentioned movie, then this is a great, great film. Don't take it too seriously and have fun. Best of all, the in-the-works sequel has every chance of learning from this film's mistakes and getting it right. Can't wait!
Rating: 
Summary: Absurd
Review: Because it begun as a videogame this isn't an excuse for lara's (superman+Rambo) powers.
The character and psyche of Lara feels fake. She never get's scared, and she is always overconfident to a point that makes you sick.
Ofcourse she is. Being a video game star she can't loose, so she never does. Well i think this is wrong because in movies real life is depicted and you can't always win.
Plus most of the scenes in the film just couldn't be happening in real life. In matrix they could but not here.
Rating:
Summary: Very Thrilling, No sex
Review: I knew that this would be a good movie, and I was right. If you have seen many reviews that say there was a 'hard to think' plot they are wrong. Here it is: First though I should explain some things first, Lara Croft is a relic hunter. An old group called the illuminati want to control time. The whole movie is about Lara, obeying her dead father's wishes has to find two parts of a triangle (it can control time), and then smash it to pieces so it cannot be put to evil use the an old cult the Illuminati. The two pieces of the triangle are at two different locations. A clock that she finds under the stairs of her house has a type of key inside it, in order to get access to any of the two halves of the triangle you need this key. One more catch, this all has to be done before the planets go out of alignment. That wasn't so confusing was it? This plot is sooo much easier to figure out than the Mummy Returns. To believe Roeper thought it was better. The only things that are even sexual about this movie is that at one time, this guy gets out of the shower and walks around naked (you don't see anything though, there is always something blocking the way), and when Lara Croft (a.j.) is in the shower. This is a must see, or must buy!
Rating:
Summary: Best Summer Movie of 2001
Review: This is a super movie. Angelina Jolie makes a great Lara Croft. This is a must see movie ***** stars
Rating:
Summary: Could've been better...
Review: I was slightly disappointed with Tomb Raider. The aspects leaned toward being unrealistic with over the top action. I don't mind a sub realistic plot like the alignment of the planets and an ancient time device that can be utilized for good or evil, but lets the make the physical abilities of the characters a little more realistic. I know Laura is an asskicking relic hunter and I really enjoyed watch Jolie bring her to life, but I would like a hint of believability. The scene where her arm is healed by a Buddhist is almost useless. If her entire body had been damaged or she was near death, this scene would have been more striking. But it was almost unnecessary. The movie is an entertaining adventure and hopefully if they make a sequel, they will work on the script and story. Jolie certainly has expressed immediate interest but hopefully she will stick to her word and stand fast to her desire for a better script.
Rating:
Summary: ian's tomb raider review
Review: the best action movie of 2001. Angelina Jolie at her best. this is the greatest video game remake ever i can't wait untill the next one. this is the next raiders of the lost ark. the mummy has nothig on tomb raider. so if you want to see a cool sci-fi movie buy or rent tomb raier
|
