Lara Croft: Tomb Raider – The Cradle of Life - Movie Review

Some things were not meant to be found.

I did not expect to be writing this already. After reviewing the very first Tomb Raider film my plan was to wait a while before tackling its sequel. Then I learned when messing about with Netflix's new interface (so far, not my cup of tea) that The Cradle of Life would leave the service soon. Well, better get to watching it than!

With the first movie a financial success and with a decent critical reception it was a no-brainer for Paramount, Core Design and all others involved to greenlight a sequel. Angeline Jolie was still the female superstar too so why not give it a second shot?

While its predecessor struggled to make it to the silver screen, there wasn´t as much drama with this one. Yes, that tax scheme is still responsible for the financing and there was some directing trouble again but that was peanuts compared to what the first move went through.

Also important to mention: this would also be the last film to star Angelina Jolie. While I didn't see it, many point towards her leading role in that first Tomb Raider film as her breakout Hollywood moment. She agreed to come back for a second round but once the movie had wrapped, she was adamant about bowing out. 

I admit the latter isn’t very confidence filling but rest assured, The Cradle of Life is an improvement over the first. There is even less depth but it's much better 'pop-corn adventure flick' if you know what I mean. 

Without further ado, let's dive into Angelina Jolie's second and last outing as Lara Croft in this sequel. 

After an earthquake near the coast of Greece unearths a lost temple housing the forgotten treasure of Alexander the Great, fortune seekers from all around the world race to the depths. Beating many treasure hunters to the punch, Lara manages to find the centre of the Temple herself but is ambushed on her way out. Killing her crew and taking the mysterious orb for themselves, Lara returns home down but not out. MI6 itself has heard whispers that a bioterrorist is behind the theft of the orb hoping it will lead him to Pandora's Box. Together with an old flame, the soldier turned con artist Terry Sheridan, Lara sets out to reclaim the orb. 

Can I just say that I'm surprised it's Pandora's Box Lara goes after and not the fabled city of Atlantis? Lara in her wetsuit was a big part of the marketing campaign. The film starts with an earthquake under the sea near Greece. Not to mention that getting to Atlantis is what the original game is all about. Because of all of that, I really thought that the film would end with Lara running through a, once again, collapsing Atlantis to a submarine or the like.

That none of this happened was actually a pleasant surprise. Atlantis has been done so many times in movies so I don't mind this film doing something different. That it focuses on something we don't often see. It makes the viewing experience more interesting that way. 

I will say that I find it weird that they felt the need to overcomplicate Pandora´s Box. I think the basics of the myth are known enough that a general audience would understand what it is about. You don´t need an entire plot dump to over-explain it and throw your own stuff in as well. That´s admittedly me being picky though so let´s digress and move on to the rest of the plot. 

The said plot is very thin. The first Tomb Raider film was not a flick with much depth but that one looks like a pool compared to this one. Lara is presented as less overtly sexy and more fashionable and snappier. I like this change since I'm not a fan of sexualizing characters but this also pretty much sums up Lara's character. Fashionable, snappy and cool. Whereas the first movie put her missing father at the forefront of her motivation to find the treasure and the spill of her character arc there is no such thing here. She goes after the orb to save the world and 'for Queen-and-Country'. All is well and good but not overly exciting to me on a character-driven level. 

A much better way to portray 'cool' Lara than what the first film did. 

There is a 'will-they-won't-they' thing with Terry but that is as far as it goes for inner conflict for our favourite British Tomb Raider. I also feel that this relationship with the lovely rogue is more tell than show. They tell you about their previous romance. They tell you about Terry's betrayal that ended the relationship. They don't show it though and as a result, most of their interactions are quippy, friendly jabs. When the final pulls a dramatic twist it doesn't feel earned or shocking. It feels out of left field, unearned and quite honestly meaningless. A disappointing note to end the film on. 

Taking one more paragraph to talk about the characters I was happy to see most of the supporting cast returned. It was easy to drop them, this is the Angelina Jolie as Lara Croft show, but I appreciate this bit of continuity. I also particularly like Chris Barrie as the Butler and was happy to see him.

Moving to our newcomers, Terry is played by Gerard Butler, not a bad actor at all and a well-cast foil to Jolie's Lara Croft. When it comes to 'big stars' the only other notable actor here is Djimon Hounsou. Another face I was glad to see even if it was only for a little while. So yeah, not as impressive of a cast as the first movie but still a solid one. 

The Cradle of Life is a lot more action-packed than its predecessor. Where the first movie spent about half the film slowly building up our mystery back in England, our dastardly villain and Lara's dad this one goes straight into action and then barely lets up. From that undersea opening to paragliding from a skyscraper, driving on the Great Wall of China to that magical finisher. It's a lot more varied, and interesting stuff, than what the first movie offered. 

The magic has been toned down, an attempt to appeal to a broader audience is my best guess, but that doesn't mean the movie lacks some neat visuals. This is a globetrotting outing so we get some neat scenery, from China to Kazakhstan, and the visual direction is just solid all around. A good combination of good, if not great, direction and good, if not great, visual design. Speaking of the direction it was in the hands of fellow Dutchmen Jan de Bont this time around. That was surprising to learn but Bont sadly did not have a great time making what would turn out to be his final film. Too much studio interference. It's what you get with so many cooks in the kitchen. The director, the movie studio, the game studio etc. 

Even so, all of this pushes this movie squarely into 'action blockbuster' territory. One with a surprising amount of heist elements. I thought that the Mission Impossible connections would end but I guess not. Maybe not completely what I would expect from a Tomb Raider movie but I had myself a good time. This film knows what it is and knows how to play to those strengths. I feel like director Jan de Bont knew that the actual plot was thin so made it a point to make sure that those 'downtime' scenes didn't drag. Whenever a big exposition dump rears its head or when we get a shot at romance between Lara and Terry it doesn't last too long. Those cheesy, cringe or just plain bad moments don't last long and we're pushed towards what makes this movie work: fun action with some fun globetrotting adventuring. 

Conclusion

I find that Lara Croft: Tomb Raider - The Cradle of Life is a better film than its predecessor. While there is even less depth, less star power and the ending leaves a lot to be desired it is a lot more consistent. The action, which this film puts at the forefront, is quite fun and varied. The fast pacing helps keep things moving on and smooths over flaws by virtue of them not lasting long. If you're looking for a fun, pop-corn action movie with some neat globetrotting and a solid cast then this is the film for you. If you want something more 'Tomb Raider' out of your Tomb Raider film though I think the other films will be more up your alley.