Xtreme bike couriers, daddy issues, eccentric fathers, amateur detours into the field of MMA, supernatural mumbo-jumbo and video game-adapted action adventure are mashed together awkwardly and sometimes risibly in Warner Bros. wholly unremarkable reboot of the “Tomb Raider” franchise. Unexceptionally directed by Roar Uthaug (Norwegian hit “The Wave“), “Tomb Raider” is superficial even for a mainstream tentpole, clumsily and unpersuasively put together and tests and breaks suspension of disbelief at every turn. An affected screenplay by Geneva Robertson-Dworet, Alastair Siddons attempts to frame its feisty, stubborn protagonist Lara Croft (Alicia Vikander) as a fiercely determined and independent young woman full of heart and resolve, but mostly displays a movie that is impressively contrived, unbelievable and fails its main character.
First and foremost, “Tomb Raider” wants it both ways, gritty and realistic, while balancing supernatural nonsense, and preposterous action adventures. And the two mix poorly. The film tries to make the case that Croft, living on what are laughably meant to be the chaotic streets of London as a bike courier and moonlighting as an MMA wannabe at night, is enough to transform her into Jason Bourne in the second half of the picture and this just never, ever remotely convinces. “Tomb Raider” asks us to take a rather absurdly difficult leap of faith to see whether Lara can push herself beyond her limits and in doing so pushes plausibility off a cliff to smash into a billion bits.
“Tomb Raider” features a disjointed, overly-elaborate narrative too, setting up the “gritty,” but mandated origin story in order to tee up the action-adventure to come and they’re practically two different movies. After a fantastical, long-winded prologue about an evil Japanese witch, “Tomb Raider” shifts focus on Lara in London, still angry about losing her unconventional, adventuring father who went mysteriously missing when she was barely a teenager. Broke and barely making ends meet, Lara’s the heir to her dad’s billion-dollar global empire, but resolute on making it on her own, she rejects her fortune and the idea that her father is truly dead.
Setting up a rather hackneyed theme of clues and riddles—daddy (an actionably bad Dominic West) always created breadcrumb brainteasers for Lara as a child, all of them depicted in mediocre, clichéd flashbacks—she conveniently comes upon a new enigmatic puzzle box hints at her father’s whereabouts. Soon, Lara goes in search of her dad’s last-known destination: a mythical tomb on a fabled island that might be somewhere off the coast of Japan. With the help of a drunken Japanese sailor (Daniel Wu; who also inexplicably transforms into competent machine-gun wielding action star later in the picture too). Once on the island, “Tomb Raider” eventually converts to the action-adventure film it’s wanted to be from the start. Everything that has come before feels like an obligation to set up a credible world that still feels impressively far-fetched and preposterous. While quite not “The Mummy” level of ridiculous, “Tomb Raider” still feels indebted to goofy supernatural, impossible action movies of the ’90s replete with corny dialogue, bad CG, and incredible, but ultimately outlandish, stunts. At the end of the day, “Tomb Raider” is run of the mill, unimaginative and forgettable despite Vikander’s best efforts convey indomitable true grit (Walton Goggins stars as the one-note bad guy).
It’s easy to denounce and demonize Hollywood, the big bad corporate evil that sucks the soul out of the cinematic arts, but perhaps the cost of careless ambition, even opportunism should be considered too. After all, perhaps Hollywood is just the delivery mechanism, and it’s you, exceptional Foreign Film Actress and you, promising up-and-coming Foreign Film Director who can choose and forge your own destiny. Because perhaps “Tomb Raider,” on paper is a good career opportunity for Uthaug and Vikander (usually known for smarter fare like “Ex Machina” and “A Royal Affair“), but did anyone actually read the script of this dud not worthy of this Oscar-winning actress? Or was her agent that convincing?
“We’re not dead yet,” Vikander, beaten and bruised, says to Lou Ren, the aforementioned sailor in a crucial moment. Volleyed back with a dramatic pause, the steely-eyed response returns with a simple, but cutting, “no shit.” It’s a pointlessly throwaway, nonsensical line, but for some reason, it becomes “The Terminator” “I’ll be back” catchphrase moment of the movie and it circles back at the end with a nod and wink. I’m certainly no genius, but I would like to submit a well-respected actor might want to nix this line for the sake of career grace.
More of an adaptation of the “Tomb Raider” video games than a remake of the Angelina Jolie-starring movies, the movie is loyal to the game lore, but fidelity to source material ultimately means nothing when the actual working materials you’re working with are banally made.
In tossing off this unremarkable picture like bad homework, director Roar Uthaug joins the ranks of promising foreign filmmakers like Joachim Rønning and Espen Sandberg (“Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales”), Baltasar Kormákur (“Contraband“), Gavin Hood (“X-Men Origins: Wolverine”), seduced to the dark side and tarnishing their careers by jumping at the first opportunity given to make a big-budget Hollywood spectacle, failing miserably and paying the price.
“Tomb Raider” even inelegantly teases a sequel with a coda that sets up Croft, who’s been pistol free for the whole movie, to become a gun-toting badass. Now that the pesky origin story is out of the way and the daddy issues resolved, “Tomb Raider” just can’t wait to become the full-throttle shoot-em-up actioner it’s been promising all along. For the sake of cinemagoers who would like to spend more time with Alicia Vikander in more worthwhile and thoughtful material, we’ll take a hard pass. [D]