Tomb Raider

Unlike many my age, my introduction to the fifth generation of home video game consoles (this would include the original PlayStation, the Nintendo 64, and the Sega Saturn, among others) didn’t involve the multiplayer fun of GoldenEye (my brother and I played the game, but I was unaware of its multiplayer mode, sadly) or most of the other industry-changing games offered by the PlayStation.  I was a Final Fantasy VII kid, mostly thanks to the influence of my circle of friends at the time, though I was interested in Spyro the Dragon (a game I still haven’t played in its entirety).  My knowledge of Tomb Raider was limited to the fact that quite a few gamers dug the hell out of it and the presence of series star Lara Croft as something of a fictitious sex symbol.  I was the proper age to notice her design, particularly her short shorts, tight shirt, dual pistols (strapped to the legs, natch), and, shall we say, bountiful bosoms.  Beyond pubescent drooling, though, I had no real interest in the games.

Over the years, the character of Lara Croft was continuously exploited for her sex appeal and firebrand nature, a staple of video game iconography.  In recent years, she’s been updated into a more realistic design, one that emphasizes the games’ action- and puzzle-solving-oriented mechanics and the character’s athletic and intellectual leanings.  Nowadays, she’s more known for her abilities than her appearance, a positive change you don’t see as often as you’d think.

With the games seeing a resurgence in popularity and the film industry’s lack of originality and desire for safe, tested sources of revenue, it was only natural that a new film would be made to capitalize.  Gone, though, are the days of the insanely cheesy and nonsensical films starring the well-cast Angelina Jolie from almost two decades ago.  In its place, we’re given a cinematic analog to the games’ and character’s evolution, and, since we’ve already gotten the Asylum knock-off already under our belts, we might as well give the inspiration a go, right?

Ms. Croft is shown earlier on in her progression than in the previous films, as we see her train and seek out her father, who’s been declared dead in absentia after disappearing during an Asiatic trek.  Lara is given clues to his whereabouts, and sets out to find him, stumbling across a malicious expedition searching for the very thing her father was after.

Credit where credit is due, Alicia Vikander is a damn fine replacement for Jolie, not only mirroring the change in the character’s game design but also bringing a hefty bit of acting talent and physical grit to the proceedings.  The film’s introduction of Lara is basic stuff, but it gives us what we need to know about her without outright explaining it to us blankly: she’s strong, confident, feisty, and doesn’t like to give up.  We see her at various points training in kickboxing and archery, talents that will be needed later on, your standard setup and payoff.  The score is also standard, doing its job without really being noticed, and the cinematography is solid enough to give us the impression of Lara’s world without ever truly impressing us.  It’s mostly fine, standard stuff.

Where the film stumbles, though, is in its tone and overall presentation.  Much like the previous two films and others in the adventure genre, the film centers on globetrotting adventures involving dangerous traps and plenty of derring-do.  And, to a degree, these elements are present here.  Unfortunately, those other films had loads of what this one completely lacks: fun.  The tone taken by director Roar Uthaug is far too self-serious for the material, everyone so stern and determined and somehow lacking nearly any semblance of a sense of humor.  Indiana Jones worked in his adventures because he was charming, witty, entertaining; and Jolie brought plenty of cheekiness to her portrayal of Lara Croft, even if the films came across too cartoonish to work as proper actioners.  Here, as strong and capable as Lara is, she’s rarely actually entertaining, and I almost never found myself caring about her during her travails.  Though much is made of her inner character, these traits are dealt with so flatly, so humorlessly, so basically that she never really seems human, just a video game avatar I’m watching someone else play.  This isn’t helped by the by-the-numbers plot (something I’m not surprised to find out was penned by a newcomer (with plenty of big features coming down the pipe, though) and the writer of Platinum Dunes’ Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles and Divergent) peppered with stock characters (Derek Jacobi’s minor role is decidedly overcooked considering its limited requirements) and a nigh-cartoonish villain who wouldn’t feel out-of-place in a mid-run Bond film, nor is the choppy, modern action flick editing any source of respite, what with its reliance on frequent quick-cuts and an inability to let the action play out cleanly before our eyes.

All told, there’s some decent stunt work, a solid turn from Vikander, and a good amount of potential here, but the overly-serious tone and determinedly standard execution of stock story elements and characters hinders any real enjoyment of the film.  It’s more dull than exciting or interesting, but it isn’t an absolute failure of storytelling like the recent Assassin’s Creed adaptation.  It’s serviceable, to be sure, and coherent, but completely lacking anything worth noting or caring.  I’d say it’s a step up for video game adaptations, but there’s a ways to go before we reach a place where we can fully praise the final product.  It’s worth a watch if the genre is your bag or if you’re particularly enamored with the character, but I’d hold off to rent it or get it on TV or streaming.