In this Headshot’s issue, we are looking at Tomb Raider’s screen adaptation that came out on the 14th of March 2018
which is based on the 2013 reboot of the game.
The first Tomb Raider game came out in 1996, featuring Lara Croft, an archaeologist
- an adventurer who got approached by Larson Conway, a hired man working for a
wealthy businesswoman who wanted her to retrieve an ancient artefact. Soon
after completing the mission, Lara finds out that the object is, in fact, just a
part of a whole and she is now chased by a second hired man who is supposed to
finish the mission. After many dangerous and deadly encounters, Lara manages to
get all pieces together and finds out the truth about the powers of the
artefact and the identity of the woman who originally hired her.
While in the original game she is presented as an experienced archaeologist, in 2013
reboot she is more of a novice, who finds herself on an unknown island after a
shipwreck. In this version of the game, she is younger, more vulnerable and
does everything out of instinct and desire for survival.
Lara Croft is
a popular and beloved character who has been out there for a while. The first
video game came out 22 years ago, which means that along with more than sixteen
games and various spinoffs on other platforms like iOS and Android, there are
also two films already out there, starring Angelina Jolie and the new one, starring Alicia Vikander. Fans have
given various feedback on both actresses’ performance and mostly negative
feedback on the films in general.
With an
average rating of 6,4 stars out of 10 by 135,785 IMDb users the film doesn’t seem to be doing
badly but when looking for reviews, it’s easier to find negative ones, with a
rating of two and three stars out of five, than positive reviews. Why is that?
It’s doubtful
that fans of the game expected its screen adaptation to be exactly like the
game but people are always hopeful that the necessary changes won’t be too many
or too bad. However, in Tomb Raider’s
case there are quite a few.
The execution
of the film as a whole isn’t bad at all. In fact, it is quite detailed when it
comes to places, people and their appearance. Alicia Vikander, for example,
pulls off Lara Croft’s updated outfit and weapons very well and just the fact
that she looks exactly like the character she is playing is enough to give hope
to the game’s fans that maybe, just maybe, the adaptation won’t be too bad. If anything, just from Vikander’s
appearance, one could get very high expectations.
The film
itself isn’t bad at all and if you are someone who’s never heard of Lara Croft
before, you would probably enjoy it but when you’re familiar with the original
plot and characters, then it is a little hard to stay unbiased and make no
comparisons while watching.
The new Tomb Raider film is heavily based on the
2013 reboot of the game but it manages to deviate itself from the story,
characters and even Lara herself. In the screen adaptation, she goes on an
unexpected adventure to find her missing father and ends up in the middle of
something way bigger that includes a threat to humanity itself. So far, so
good.
However, one
of the biggest differences between the film and the game is that her father in
the game is dead. A Trinity agent named Ana was hired to get close to him and
kill him but grew too attached to the family so another agent was tasked to
finish the job. His murder is made to look like a suicide and Lara was raised
by a family friend, called Conrad Roth. In the film, however, her father is
absent for the majority of her early life, because he was looking for Himiko's
secrets.
Additionally,
in the film, her dad is a businessman who practices archaeology as a hobby,
while in the game he is a successful and popular archaeologist whose reputation
starts going downhill when it’s found out that he has started looking into some
supernatural rituals for resurrection after his wife’s passing.
One thing that
both the game and the film have in common is that Lara rejects her inheritance
but the major difference here is that in the game she continued her education,
works odd jobs to support herself and eventually becomes an archaeologist. In
contrast, the movie Lara didn’t go to university, instead, she works as a
courier and occasionally gets beaten up at her boxing practices while in the
game Lara’s guardian, Conrad Roth, taught her self-defence.
Another big distinction is the reason she went to Yamatai. In the game, this
is her first major expedition, along with the famous archaeologist Dr James
Whitman and her best friend Samantha Nishimura and five more people, who are
all non-existent in the film. They work together in order to survive the island
and escape the cult and Samantha ends up having a major role in the story. In
the adaptation, Lara is joined by Lu Ren who also wants to find his missing
father. Surprisingly, he doesn’t exist in the game.
In the reboot,
Trinity isn’t the main enemy, instead, the island is home to a brotherhood that worships Himiko and is looking for her successor by
putting innocent women through a deadly ritual to see if her body could hold
the dead queen’s spirit. Samantha ends up being their next victim. In the film
that brotherhood doesn’t exist at all and the main antagonist is Trinity.
Moreover,
Himiko, the ancient queen in question, was evil, according to the game. While
in the film her body is the home of a deadly disease spreadable by touch, in
the game Himiko has actual supernatural abilities such as controlling the
weather. Maybe the idea of the disease that spreads by touch came from the
original story in the game, according to which Queen Himiko was so evil that
she could kill with a single touch. On top of that, Yamatai was her kingdom and
she, its ruthless ruler, while in the game she was exiled there.
These, of
course, aren’t all of the differences between the film and the game but they
are some of the major ones. Looking at the reboot’s plot and the film’s, one could say that
the game appears to be a lot more appealing and thrilling. There are more characters to connect to and worry
about and it’s easier to understand the relationships between them because they
all have had some backstory together.
However,
excluding the major differences between the game and the film, there is one
that isn’t actually a bad one. In the screen adaptation, Lara is presented as a
more relatable and sympathetic character than her game counterpart. While in
the game she kills countless people and doesn’t show any real emotion, which
makes her an unsympathetic and unreliable character, the film shows the effect
her first kill had on her which also adds up a more realistic touch to the
whole story. By keeping her kill count up to just two victims and focusing on
her humanity, the film manages to transform Lara’s character into something
better and more humane.
Films based on
games aren’t always received well, making a 10-hour long story into just under the two-hour-long film isn’t an easy job and sometimes the attempts are less than
unsuccessful just like the case with the Assassins’
Creed film that focuses on the least interesting aspects of the story, and World of Warcraft which apparently
suffered from studio interference. If it hadn’t been for the audience of the
games, these films would have probably had less success while Tomb Raider, with all its imperfections, could be considered independent,
thanks to its plot and a good cast.
No comments:
Post a Comment