The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
I know the first wasn't exactly a fantastic masterpiece but the second one in comparison was just god awful. I didn't really notice until now (watching the original on VHS) but the original is actually quite a good film just to pick up and watch. You could do worse! A LOT worse! Anyway I can't quite put my finger on it, so I want you to tell me why they messed up that sequal so much?
Page:
cipro wrote:
>like the beginning where Lara gets to fight a robot only
>to find out that it’s a bloody test dummy. What a waste of time.
I thought that was quite a good opening for the film. Finding out it was a test dummy made it even better.
>like the beginning where Lara gets to fight a robot only
>to find out that it’s a bloody test dummy. What a waste of time.
I thought that was quite a good opening for the film. Finding out it was a test dummy made it even better.
Cub!st wrote:
> but the original is actually quite
> a good film just to pick up and watch. You could do worse! A LOT
> worse!
You could do worse, but not by much. The original Tomb Raider film was truly diabolical. An inane plot that made no sense, yet still led itself by the usual, boring clichés, the director also seemed to go out his way to add all kinds of mythical nonsense into the film, probably because he saw bits of it in the game and thought the kiddies he’s selling the film to would think it would be “like, totally cool man…” Hence you get that stupid scene where lots of stone statues come to life.
The action sequence aren’t even that good either, restricted by the 12 rating the film got, the action scenes where reduced to seeing Rimmer and Lara punching and shooting the walls near bad guys but nothing near violent enough to make them that little bit more exciting.
Then there was that unnecessary scene where Lara for some reason goes and prays with a bunch of Tibetan monks, why? Described by the actors and crew as the spiritual heart of the film, because it has monks and people praying in it, so obviously that gives the film some kind of meaning, right? In essence that was just a nice way to say they wasted time in between trying to string the monotonous story and dull action scenes together, and this wasn’t the only unnecessary scene thrown in, like the beginning where Lara gets to fight a robot only to find out that it’s a bloody test dummy. What a waste of time.
If the sequel is anything like the first Tomb Raider (and from what I’ve read it’s actually quite worse, if such a thing where possible) then I’ll be steering well clear of it. Hopefully the films and the god-awful games will finally sink this long-winded franchise for good.
> but the original is actually quite
> a good film just to pick up and watch. You could do worse! A LOT
> worse!
You could do worse, but not by much. The original Tomb Raider film was truly diabolical. An inane plot that made no sense, yet still led itself by the usual, boring clichés, the director also seemed to go out his way to add all kinds of mythical nonsense into the film, probably because he saw bits of it in the game and thought the kiddies he’s selling the film to would think it would be “like, totally cool man…” Hence you get that stupid scene where lots of stone statues come to life.
The action sequence aren’t even that good either, restricted by the 12 rating the film got, the action scenes where reduced to seeing Rimmer and Lara punching and shooting the walls near bad guys but nothing near violent enough to make them that little bit more exciting.
Then there was that unnecessary scene where Lara for some reason goes and prays with a bunch of Tibetan monks, why? Described by the actors and crew as the spiritual heart of the film, because it has monks and people praying in it, so obviously that gives the film some kind of meaning, right? In essence that was just a nice way to say they wasted time in between trying to string the monotonous story and dull action scenes together, and this wasn’t the only unnecessary scene thrown in, like the beginning where Lara gets to fight a robot only to find out that it’s a bloody test dummy. What a waste of time.
If the sequel is anything like the first Tomb Raider (and from what I’ve read it’s actually quite worse, if such a thing where possible) then I’ll be steering well clear of it. Hopefully the films and the god-awful games will finally sink this long-winded franchise for good.
It happens to most film sequels, they put little effort into the plot or anything because they know if the original was successful then people will pay money to see the sequel. So it becomes more of a profit making exercise rather than good film making (there are excpetions though).
Hmmm short and not so sweet. I saw a couple of borrows from Indiana Jones but I didn't think much of it. I guess what really got to me was the lack of plot and assortment of gun fights with very few consequences you know? It was just bang bang bang "We're safe for about another 20 minutes before we get attacked again!" bang, bang, bang!
They bully-rammed the plot out of Indiana Jones. That's why.
I know the first wasn't exactly a fantastic masterpiece but the second one in comparison was just god awful. I didn't really notice until now (watching the original on VHS) but the original is actually quite a good film just to pick up and watch. You could do worse! A LOT worse! Anyway I can't quite put my finger on it, so I want you to tell me why they messed up that sequal so much?
Page: