Viewing Thread:
"A couple of Tomb Raider reviews...oh dear"

These are from aint-it-cool.com, a pretty reliable site on what's good and what isn't.
See what you think and, I'm sad to say I'm not suprised:


"It tosses plot at us in ungraceful chunks and just lays there, inert, like we're watching someone play a game for us with a cheat guide open and steering them through. There's no tension. Everything is just handed to Lara, and we're never once engaged, because we never once actually know what the hell is happening.
Why is Noah Taylor in this film? Why is Chris Barrie in this film? Why does Iain Glenn give such an incredibly painful performance as the bad guy in this film?Where is the sense of fun?
TOMB RAIDER is neither the end of modern cinema nor the guilt-free pleasure machine that lifelong mammary fan Roger Ebert paints it as. It is a lifeless movie from a truly horrible commercial filmmaker. It is a misstep in the starring career of a promising lead actress. And it's a major setback for two producers who have a great slate of material. I hope this ends up being an expensive lesson that spurs everyone involved to do better things in the future."


"This film is ugly, boring and uninspired.
In a single shot, they manage to defecate not only upon the beauty of Angkor Watt, but in a blink…. They voided upon Venice…. In a single transition they made both places look like total logs.
The plotline was overly convoluted and badly told onscreen. There are random left turns that are not surprising, just boring. There is no sexuality in this movie… Plenty of alleged chest, but no titillation.

The lights are never on in TOMB RAIDER… except to over light all the sets and make them look cheap and fake…. People should be imprisoned for making Angkor Watt look pedestrian and ugly. One of mankind’s greatest achievements and it looks like crap here…. How do you do that? Is there a class in film school somewhere that teaches one how to make beauty plain? Does it come before or after the class on making sure to WINK at the camera every 3 minutes?
Do not waste a dime on this! "

. . .

There you go kids, another Mummy Returns special effect laden t**d.

Goatboy wrote:

I know Tomb
> Raider will make millions, and another will appear.
That's the way
> it is.

A bit like the game then??

Goatboy wrote:

"The Dish."

Hopefully going to see that soon.

"Wonder Boys?"

Yup. I loved that film...

Fair enough, everyone to their own.

I'm just offering an alternative.

I loved The X-Men.
Good story, good effects, I cared about what happened.
Made by Brian Singer, who also made The Usual Suspects and Apt Pupil.

Same with The Three Kings.
Made by David O Russell, who made Spanking The Monkey.

I think it may be because these directors have an indie sensibility - a background in utilising plot, character etc because they didnt have millions of dollars.

By limiting the money, you are forced to find alternate ways to entertain - often for the better I think.

I know Tomb Raider will make millions, and another will appear.
That's the way it is.

Personally, I choose not to see these things and read The Net or magazines to find films that I want to see rather than "I'm bored, what's on?"

Tomb Raider: but I liked it....

That's what many people would say.

I confess, I usually only watch mindless trash in the cinema, and I enjoy it.

Apathy.

I guess I'm happy to be spoon fed what's right in front of me, rather than seek out something with a little intelligence.

Ah.
I've seen the original "Heaven can Wait" and I liked that.
I'll check that out.
Cheers Bonus.

And to highlight my point about big stupid movies:

One of the biggest films last year, in every country in the world was?....

Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon.

A 2hr film in Mandarin, set in Feudal Era Japan.
Not many special effects (wire-work mainly), no explosions, no cheesy script, no sunsets over burning buildings.
Yet it made money hand over fist.
Why?

Why would the entire world go to see a film in Mandarin?

Because it was beautifully shot, involving, a story with characters you cared about, plot, stunning action scenes, strong female leads (Jade Fox was a woman in her later years but could destroy you and me together).

An intelligent, well made, articulate movie.

You can make money with decent films, it doesn't have to be mega-bucks, huge explosions, women in shorts, CGI etc etc

Chris Rock, gets killed and is allowed to come back because the Angel stole his sould, before he was supposed to die!!


Very Funny!!

Down to Earth?

What's that one?

This is true, everyone go see Get Over It and Down to Earth, really good films!!!

fair enough.

I'm not telling people what to do, I'm just saying that as long as people go and hand over their money, this mindless hormone-food will be out year after year after year.

Yes, Angelina has a nice body. But that does not justify this movie earning millions and millions, whilst smaller, indie movies spent up to 2 years to get financed.

It's just wrong to me. (TO ME before someone starts lecturing me).

The Mummy Returns, Tomb Raider, Pearl Harbour...all big loud empty exercises in taking your money and offering little in reward.

Did anyone here apart from me see a movie called The Dish.

Anyone?

Thought not.
And that's my point.

Or Dark Days?
Wonder Boys?
Nurse Betty?

I just dont think this can be right.

But Goaty, I pay £9.99 to UGC for unlimited cinema access, so I go to see everything anyway!!