Rating: 
Summary: ALEXS CAPSULE MOVIE REVIEWS
Review: Highlights: Colorful cinematography; spectacular stunts; adventurous feel; Angelina Jolie; great locations.
Lowpoints: Script falters at times; predictable.Conclusion: Ask me why critics HATED the 'Tomb Raider' sequel, and I'll honestly retort 'beats me'. Although 'Lara Croft: Tomb Raider II. The Cradle of Life' isn't a masterpiece by any standards (you'd be better off re-watching Indiana Jones' adventures), it still is better than its predecessor, and is worth the admission price; if you have kids, buy the DVD. The film boasts an ambitious female hero (Jolie ROCKS!), awe-inspiring stunts (people fly!), hot settings (England! China! Africa!) and an involving plot, including frightening creatures that leap at everything that moves, and a wonderful underwater shark-fighting sequence. Despite simple dialogue, a predictable narration and uneven editing, 'Cradle...' offers a harmlessly adventurous yarn, and by 'harmless' I mean it is not racist, feminist, or discriminatory in any other ways, which is a blessing, with the likes of 'Rush Hour 2', 'Bulletproof Monk' and '2 Fast 2 Furious' stretching their forced PG-13 rating with dim-witted insults. Those movies' inanity is an insult by itself - the only insult Jan De Bont's audacious, enthused sequel presents to the viewer is the prospect of recollecting its ridiculously lengthy title.
Rating: 
Summary: Tomb Raider: A Waste of time and Money$$$
Review: This film was the most dissapointing film of the summer. It wasn't the worst, but it was just a waste of everyone's valuable time. Where to start. Lara croft,is played by Angelina Jolie. She's beautiful but this role hasn't spread her range as an actress. The video game based sequel has Croft in search of an ancient artifact called Pandora's Box, "The most powerful thing ever imagined." I'm getting tired of the same old plot of an ancient artifact being searched for. Why can the plot be about how the audience can give a damn about this film. The visuals are nice, but there so boring and repitive that i almost fell asleep. The ending is boring as well. At least this film is better than the original. But not by much. I'll just rather play the new "Tomb Raider" game that came out this year. Oh yeah that sucks too.
Rating:
Summary: What the hell are you people talking about?
Review: What are you people on? This was a terrible movie; I just saw it an hour ago. It was one of the biggest wastes of time I have ever spent on a movie. It had no plot line; all it was was an excuse to see Angelina Jolie jump up and down with a bad British accent. The jumping up in down deserved a three star but the accent and the constant introduction of dumb characters drop it to two.
Rating:
Summary: Marginally better than the first movie
Review: The second (and hopefully the last) in the film versions of the Tomb Raider computer game is decidedly better than the first. It achieves this primarily by not being as ridiculous in spots as the first one was. This particular film has the oddity of starting off as a story about a female Indiana Jones but ends up being vastly more like a female James Bond. One of the things I liked about the Tomb Raider computer games was the rather primitive feel to the games: caves, caverns, jungles, rivers, cliffs, ancient ruins. But this second film is stuffed primarily with high tech gadgets and gizmos. The story is pretty uninteresting, but I'm sure no one was really expecting much in the way of plot. I really, really like Angelina Jolie, but I have to say that at this point she just hasn't hit her stride as an actress. I don't know if it is that she isn't being offered first-rate scripts or if she or her agent is making some abysmal choices about which films to make. She is a good actress, with an absolutely gorgeous, unforgettable face, and she should have been able to craft a better career at this point than she has. She rightly won her Oscar for GIRL INTERRUPTED, but her films since then have been more or less a string of disappointments. Her next couple of films are unlikely to right the boat. I am always extremely sceptical about historical biopics to revive someone's career as a serious actor, so I am leery of what ALEXANDER (with Angelina playing Olympias) and LOVE AND HONOR (with Angelina as Catherine the Great) will mean for her career. She mainly is playing in uninteresting projects, but all indications are that she is a smart, serious woman with some substantive concerns about the world. So why so many lame projects? My lone hope is that all of these projects will make lots of money, and make her one of the first actresses that people think of when they have a hot script. And then I hope that she will make those pictures instead of more TOMB RAIDERs.
Rating: 
Summary: Action-filled sequel
Review: Lara Croft Tomb Raider: The Cradle of Life is a rare sequel that is better than the ones that came before it. In the sequel, Lara must find Pandora's Box using a orb that will direct her where to go. All that it known about its whereabouts is that it is somewhere in the Cradle of Life, where mankind began. As well, this isn't the Pandora's Box of Greek mythology, but instead something that will unleash a weapon that could wipe out humanity if found. Also interested in finding it is a biological weapons expert/salesman who sees the possibilities it possesses. This is an action-packed movie that never slows down from beginning to end. That is the strength of the movie overall although there is some semblance of a real plot here. This is an enjoyable movie that will keep you interested throughout. Once again, Angelina Jolie reprises the role of globe-trotting adventurer Lara Croft. Besides being incredibly gorgeous in the role, she is very believable as she performs many of her own stunts. Gerard Butler plays Terry Anderson, an ex-Royal Marine gone bad who must now work with Lara to retrieve Pandora's Box. Ciaran Hinds is good as the villain also trying to retrieve the box. Djimon Hunsou is also very good in a small role. The DVD offers widescreen presentation, 6 deleted scenes, an alternate ending, director commentary, five featurettes about the movie, and two music videos. This is by no means a great movie, but it is at least worth a watch if for nothing else than to see Angelina Jolie. For an exciting movie that never slows down from beginning to end, check out Lara Croft Tomb Raider: The Cradle of Life.
Rating: 
Summary: Paramount really is "Patheic Pictures."
Review: Weak entry by a once better movie studio into the current genre of video game movies finds Jollie going on another quest to save the world with a non existent script and zero performance at the box office as this movie was quickly surpassed by other better films.
Rating:
Summary: 5 Stars for Angelina Jolie, three for plot/script = 4 stars
Review: Angelina Jolie is terrific as Lara Croft, a video game character brought to life. I thought she was very good in the first Tomb Raider, and now she's even better. Her physical look, her movement (and that of the stunt crew), her voice, her humour and her darkness are all that they should be, and it's frankly an amazing performance. Gerard Butler, as Croft's ex Terry Sheridan, was also very good, and added some nice complexity to the plot. I also thought the CGI at the end was well done, with some horrifying monsters. There is a very stylish quality to the film, reminiscent of computer games but not too much so, except perhaps at the very end. It's just too bad that the script wasn't better, the plot a bit less silly, and the action choreographed better. Okay, I know I'm asking for a lot for a movie based on a video game. Even Raiders of the Lost Ark had its weak moments--remember when Indiana Jones climbed aboard a Nazi submarine and it sailed halfway around the world either without submerging, or even less likely, without anyone noticing a new crewmember? Improvement has occurred from the completely nonsensical plot of Tomb Raider I, but there's still room to go. What is it with characters who routinely deal with devices obviously magical, but who can't get it through their thick skulls that releasing "anti-life" just might be bad for them, too? And Tomb Raider II needed a real villain. We got a lot of bad guys, but nobody who really brought it off. Even though they planned to release a plague that could destroy all life on Earth, the bad guys never seemed truly terrifying. The Chinese bad guys were practically ludicrous--and why is it that in Hollywood films, Western guys and gals always beat the Chinese at martial arts, their own game? Finally, in an action movie, the action needs to work a bit better. The helicopter scene was actually quite poor, and I expect I could put my finger on the moment when the stunt double was used. Still, I have hopes for the franchise. Wouldn't a smart, ironic Tomb Raider III be something to see?
Rating:
Summary: Better than the second, But is it right for you?
Review: When the first movie stormed the theaters it was met with lackluster reviews and lower than expected public reception. Though it garnered enough popularity, especially compared to its rival Final Fantasy: The Spirits within, that a sequel was inevitable. Many people, including myself, thought this was a bad idea since the first film explored new levels of crap for video game-to-film translations. But the next installment proved there was nowhere to but up. The second film was far superior to its predecessor.
Now its important to realize what your getting into when you watch this film. If your expecting the next Indiana Jones flick, look elsewhere. Angelina Jolie's character and acting skills pale in comparison to Harrison Ford's. Lara Croft, the films lead character has been called a mix of Indiana Jones and James Bond. Though she often finds herself in impossibly violent stunt filled conflicts (ala Bond) in the midst of searching for ancient artifacts (ala Indiana), this film differs from both series almost entirely. This film never really appears to be realistic. Though they may have intended it to be, the believability of this film is non existent, unlike the other two said series. This fact however doesn't detract from the experience because it offers everything you could expect from an action film. A serviceable story, great stunts, good music, and a satisfying ending with a fun unexpected twist. If your looking for a good time and nothing incredibly deep (much like the video game) this is your film.
The acting and scripting are a step up from the first. No longer do the lines stink of cheese and the acting induce a snicker. The characters are unique and believable, and the lines seem more earnest. The special effects are quite good too. After watching the making of featurette I was surprised to find how many scenes had special effects that I never even noticed or realized the extent of.
This is a fun watch, and for action fans, it's worth the Buy. However, if you're looking for the next Indiana Jones stay away, unless you thought Temple of Doom was the best of the three. For anyone else looking for some good entertainment, they should probably rent it. If your not that die hard action fan, there really is no point in watching this film more than once. I recommend this to anyone, especially those that hated the first, they might be pleasantly surprised.
Rating:
Summary: High Entertainment Value
Review: Having enjoyed the first movie, it was a "given" that I pre-order the sequel, once Angelina Jolie was still Lara Croft. As has been mentioned before, Angelina Jolie was born to be Lara Croft. Seldom does an actress fit a part (and costume) so perfectly and capably. That said, Cradle of Life is as good a movie as the first, except that Lara has less fighting time, and does more stunts. I was disappointed with the climatic fight scene with Jonathan Reiss, as a warrior of her calibre should have been able to handle the likes of him with much greater finesse. Terry Sheridan is great as a tough guy, but lacks the sparks to ignite Lara convincingly on screen. Now if the role had been played by Colin Farrell or Hugh Jackman, for example, there would have been sparks flying all over the screen. The scenery and special effects are again great, and while the movie shouldn't be taken seriously, it scores high marks for superb entertainment value.
Rating:
Summary: This is Jolie's attempt at being Halle Berrie.....
Review: Okay, the first movie felt like a foray into Indiana Jones territory. This new sequel felt like a revist to Indiana Jones AND the DIE ANOTHER DAY movie. Angelina Jolie in a tight silver jumpsuit reminded me so much of Halle Berrie jumping around in an orange 70s style bikini suit in the latest James Bond flick. And then there are the gadgets...guns...cars....motorcycles...etc. It feels like the producers of the movie can't decide whether to make Lara Croft into another Indy...or maybe a cross between Indy and James Bond. Still, I think this movie's story was better than the first one....that's the reason for the extra star. The pandora's box scenerio is very timely considering what kind of world we are living in today. The action in this movie is much more engrossing than the first also. Like I said in my other review, if you are into adventurous romp....look at this one. Otherwise, leave it alone for a rainy day when there is nothing else on tv.
|
