Author Topic: Tomb Raider: Cradle of Life and why it bombed at the box office! (Read 7011 times)

nitsu niflheim · « **on:** July 28, 2003, 09:53:13 AM »

I haven't seen the movie, so I can't say whether the movie was good or not, but based on reviews I have read, the movie was suppose to be a lot better than the last Tomb Raider movie, and it was getting very good reviews from the magazines I have access to, so I'm wondering why it did so bad over the weekend. According to Spong.com, the move brought in less than half what the first TR movie made when it opened in 2001, that is really shocking, I was expecting TR:CoL to be # 1, but alas, Spy Kids 3D was. Could it be possible that the movie bombed was because of the latest game in the series being so bad that it's sort of a backlash against the series? I find that easy to accept, but it's still vert strange.

ThePerm · « **Reply #1 on:** July 28, 2003, 10:47:03 AM »

the bad game reputation didnt stop the first one. I remember one of my comments when the first oen came out. "i l hate the game series, the movie was cool though". This oen was pretty good. Certainly better then the last bond movie(omg that one sucked, Halle Berry and a few cliché jokes will not make it a new breath of life. I love the bond series and Brosnan is a great Bond..but realluy they need to focus on plotline better...i mean it wasnt a movie it was trying to conform to what all other bond flicks were like) anyways this tomb raider movie had something goingg on for it that were cool...but other thigns that ruined it for me. Like the lead male actor...well all his character devlopment is a waste...it seems liek the ending was made ebcause the director hadn't killed the real bad guy off in an exciting enough way(though cool...cool but too quickly).

as for sales....Movie sales are unpredictable. I dont think anyone really remembers this is based off a video game...its an Angelina Jolie movie more then anything. Her sex appeal should be selling the movie. i mean shes hot damnit.

HiTmaN · « **Reply #2 on:** July 28, 2003, 04:35:01 PM »

They need to make Angelina naked in the movie, it'll sky rocket.

DRJ · « **Reply #3 on:** July 28, 2003, 06:00:53 PM »

I would pay to see it if they did that.

PIAC · « **Reply #4 on:** July 28, 2003, 08:39:57 PM »

hey i loved the latest bond film

felt more like the old ones for me, was more grittyer, and halle berry wasn't bad at all in it, i thought she did quite well, alot better than i expected

Termin8Anakin · « **Reply #5 on:** July 28, 2003, 08:53:59 PM »

The new Bond wasn't bad, it was just too much action (some that are impossible and not like Bond at all, like the surfing at the beginning, and the one where he parachutes over the wave) and not enough espionage. The next one has to be something like Goldeneye. See how the suspense comes from the snooping around, and not really the action sequences? I mean, this was the first modern Bond film where Bond isn't in an actual 'car' chase. That's why i liked The World is Not Enough.

I can't really say anything about TR:TCoL, since it's not out here yet, but i'm gonna see it regardless. It'll give me something to do on my breaks.

oohhboy · « **Reply #6 on:** July 29, 2003, 04:35:45 AM »

Die another day. I had no beef with the intro or the first half of the movie. But once it pasted that hour mark, it wasn't a bond movie anymore. It became more of a star Trek movie with too much silly action that defied the laws of phyics a little too much for it's own good.

Halle is pretty low on the list of Bond girls. Her counter part was way better even as a villian and could very well replaced her as the Bond girl.

It loved the director, especialy how he made it grittier as PIAC said. But he got a lousy plot for the last half of the movie. Golden eye is still the best over-all out of the Brosan Bonds.

"They need to make Angelina naked in the movie, it'll sky rocket."

Why not just make a prono? But she is so not my type.

ut Kristinanna Loken seems to grow on you. At first I thought nah, but now I actaully think she is not bad at all.

Termin8Anakin · « **Reply #7 on:** July 29, 2003, 05:30:22 AM »

yeah. the beginning was great, up until the went to the Ice Palace.
And showing Bond actually in the act of sex isn't what Bond is about.

They just need a plot with action that isn't silly, and they'll have a winner. Bond brings in that wit ("...or at least half of it" hahahaha!), and that style. Please. No more invisible cars, no sun beams, no sailing over waves, and please, no techno Bond themes.

I like David Arnold's Tomorrow Never Dies score the best out of his ones for TWINE and DAD. I only bought Eric Serra's Goldeneye OST cause I thought it had the waaay cool Bond theme music for the library and tank chases, but alas, it didn't (watch the movie - the music starts when they escape from Orumov when he shoots Mishkin).

Grey Ninja · « **Reply #8 on:** July 29, 2003, 05:46:17 AM »

Quote
Originally posted by: DRJ
I would pay to see it if they did that.

Watch Gia.

I never saw the movie because Tomb Raider is over and done. The first movie was interesting because it was something new. The sequel isn't interesting for the same reason nobody cares about the games anymore. It's done and finished.

nitsu niflheim · « **Reply #9 on:** July 29, 2003, 05:53:30 AM »

If you want to see Angelina Jolie nude then watch a lot of her movies older/earlier, Gia as Grey mentioned, and also Foxfire (I think that's the right name), The movie she was in with Billy Bob and John Cusack where they are flight controllers and she is Billy Bob's wife, I can't remember the name. Foxfire she is very nude, I think about the same as Gia.

And now the movie execs are blaming the newest game and it being so bad as for the movie doing so poorly.

Termin8Anakin · « **Reply #10 on:** July 29, 2003, 05:54:07 AM »

The first movie was too much of an action film and less of an adventure film.
Extreme Sports and extreme stunts is not really what adventure films is all about.

Grey Ninja · « **Reply #11 on:** July 29, 2003, 06:03:35 AM »

Quote
Originally posted by: nitsujdark
If you want to see Angelina Jolie nude then watch a lot of her movies older/earlier, Gia as Grey mentioned, and also Foxfire (I think that's the right name), The movie she was in with Billy Bob and John Cusack where they are flight controllers and she is Billy Bob's wife, I can't remember the name. Foxfire she is very nude, I think about the same as Gia.

Yes, but Gia was MUCH MUCH better, because of the content of the nude scenes.

I am not really an Angelina Jolie fan, but the opening bit of Gia really did it for me.

oohhboy · « **Reply #12 on:** July 29, 2003, 06:51:28 AM »

Quote
he movie she was in with Billy Bob and John Cusack where they are flight controllers and she is Billy Bob's wife, I can't remember the name.

The movie is called Pushing Tin. I saw the last week on T.V. No a bad movie if some what pointless.

PIAC · « **Reply #13 on:** July 29, 2003, 10:13:15 AM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Termin8Anakin
yeah. the beginning was great, up until the went to the Ice Palace.
And showing Bond actually in the act of sex isn't what Bond is about.

They just need a plot with action that isn't silly, and they'll have a winner. Bond brings in that wit ("...or at least half of it" hahahaha!), and that style. Please. No more invisible cars, no sun beams, no sailing over waves, and please, no techno Bond themes.

what about moonraker? or diamonds are forever?

ohwell each to their own, but yeah i hated the theme also.

*rents gia*

Grey Ninja · « **Reply #14 on:** July 29, 2003, 10:26:12 AM »

I hate everything about Die Another Day. It wasn't even a good try. It was worse than Dr. No.

HiTmaN · « **Reply #15 on:** July 29, 2003, 02:27:38 PM »

I think gia has a lesbian scene with Angelina, not sure. I dont like seeing hot actresses with other guys, I like seeing them by themselves. I cant stand some other dude taking his clothes off...it irratates me.

ThePerm · « **Reply #16 on:** July 29, 2003, 04:54:33 PM »

shes nude in alot of movies...nothign special..iv seen her nude more then most actresses. She has the same appeal as tomb raider. people only watch her movies to look at her lol. Also in hackers(hmm someone had a growth spurt since that movie lol) and in girl interupted...alot of nake jolie. The funny thing is she looks ALOT like her father so basically your looking at John Voit naked lol ahahahahhahaha

nitsu niflheim · « **Reply #17 on:** July 30, 2003, 04:43:46 AM »

Quote
Originally posted by: HiTmaN
I think gia has a lesbian scene with Angelina, not sure. I dont like seeing hot actresses with other guys, I like seeing them by themselves. I cant stand some other dude taking his clothes off...it irratates me.

Angelina Jolie left her husband, Jonny Lee Miller (whom she met doing the movie Hackers) for the woman she costared in Foxfire with, Jenny Shimizu. Angelina Jolie is bisexual.

DRJ · « **Reply #18 on:** July 31, 2003, 04:28:09 AM »

Companies like to license the rights to make movies based on games or games based on movies because they figure they can stamp the label on any piece of crap they make and it will sell. The problem is that if whatever was licensed loses popularity, nobody will pay to go see a bad movie, or play a bad game based on something that sux. Tomb Raider just isnt any good. People can blame the bad games for hurting the movie sales, but the bottom line is that the movie cant stand on its own. Thats not the games fault, thats the movie makers fault for being lazy and not having a good story line (i.e. plot, it seams like a lot of movies dont bother with them anymore).

It seams like a lot of movies people are just running around doing something, then something else happens for no reason and we go do something else. There is nothing to draw you in and keep you interested.

Its like in Terminator 3.

The machines dont know where Conors is so they send the terminatrix mack to kill all his LTs. ok I can buy that, but 5 minutes later the terminatrix finds Conors and then a minute later Arnold is there out of nowhere to save him. Towards the end of the movie when Conors escapes with his wife to be nobody else knows where they are going except the father who dies. Then all of a sudden the terminatrix finds them, but fortunately just in the nick of time Arnold shows up to save the day.

Movie makers must figure that if they put some good effects in a movie, add some top name actors, hype the hell out of it, it will sell. They dont bother actually making the movie worth seeing. These movies may have good openings, but after people see it and reviews are posted the sales spiral downward.

oohhboy · « **Reply #19 on:** July 31, 2003, 07:51:44 AM »

The machines dont know where Connor is so they send the terminatrix mack to kill all his LTs. ok I can buy that, but 5 minutes later the terminatrix finds Conors and then a minute later Arnold is there out of nowhere to save him. Towards the end of the movie when Conors escapes with his wife to be nobody else knows where they are going except the father who dies. Then all of a sudden the terminatrix finds them, but fortunately just in the nick of time Arnold shows up to save the day.

The first bit can be explained by sheer luck that the vet whos is his future wife happens to meet up with him and since she is one of his Lts, she is already on the list. Unlike Conner, she doesn't live off the gird. The terminator finds him because he finds her since she is the only two targets that he is assigned to protect and the termiator having been programed by Bannister would know where she lived/worked etc.

Conner leaves in the plane, but the place he left was a milarty installation which would have it's own radar, therefore the TX would have been able to track their departure. Also the terminator was there to listen to where they were to be going to. The plot is alot more tightly written than 95% of action movies out there.

DRJ · « **Reply #20 on:** July 31, 2003, 10:16:45 AM »

"The plot is alot more tightly written than 95% of action movies out there"

Maybe, but that is only because the bar has been lowered so much. Just my opinion, but if you look at the plots for Spiderman, or Fellowship they are very well done. Most of the story follows in a logical progression. Most action movies are loosly tied together by coincidences.

PIAC · « **Reply #21 on:** July 31, 2003, 10:21:03 AM »

well those movies didn't really have to work that hard on the plots, they have the comic and book to get the plot from, but your point still stands

oohhboy · « **Reply #22 on:** August 01, 2003, 02:05:44 AM »

Atleast T3 doesn't leave you sitting there thinking WTF just happen like alot of other BS action movies these days which can't even get the gravity right with people and cars acting like they are on the moon.

T3 is a great action movie with it's flaws, but it is a heck of alot better than alot of movies for years. As PIAC said, the others had an entire series of comics and books to go on while T3 relied on itself for ideas.

Termin8Anakin · « **Reply #23 on:** August 01, 2003, 05:22:13 AM »

It's so weird how many of Speilberg's great movies were based on novels.
Shame really.
But action movies that rely on the writer's genius is rare, and quite a celebratory event.
The Matrix Reloaded was quite good, but relied too heavily on special effects and was too 'Hollywood-ized'.
I'll have to actually see Cradle of Life though before i make a good judgment (or bad one).
You know, its funny how many of you (maybe all of you?) found Cradle to be an under-par film, cause Angelina Jolie said that even she thought the script for TR1 was bad, and wouldn't do TR2 unless the script was so much better. Hahaha.

News:

Author Topic: Tomb Raider: Cradle of Life and why it bombed at the box office! (Read 7011 times)