Tomb Raider review: Alicia Vikander plays an uninspiring Lara Croft in this boring reboot

The quality of video game adaptations have never hit the heights of Angelina Jolie’s 2001 and 2003 Tomb Raider films - Lara Croft: Tomb Raider in 2001 and The Cradle Of Life in 2003. When the very movie you're rebooting is at the top of the list, it's a hard act to follow. Alicia Vikander plays Lara Croft, years after Angelina Jolie was considered an almost perfect casting choice for the franchise.

Unlike in the earlier movies, the reboot harks back to the absolute beginning of Lara Croft's career, a time when her father disappeared, was presumed dead, and she had to take over the reigns of the Croft empire. This one is based on the 2013 video game reboot that reconstructed the very origins of Lara Croft.

The movie begins seven years after Richard Croft (Dominic West), Lara's father's, disappearance. Lara is a bike courier and refuses to believe it when she is told that Richard has been declared dead. Lara, after taking over her father's possessions, unearths a treasure trove of clues that lead her in search of a Japanese goddess, the same that led Richard to his disappearance. Turns out that they aren't the only ones. Mathias Vogel (Walton Goggins) and his team are already on the island, long in search of the contents of the tomb. On the way, she picks up the drunken fisherman Lu Ren (Daniel Wu), who takes her to the most treacherous part of the sea between Hong Kong and California.

The new Croft is very much unlike the old Croft. At heart, they may be the same, but the new one lacks the invulnerability and the guns. The new ones seem much the opposite, a wounded soldier who isn't fit enough to be dodging bullets (while she strikes with bows & arrows) and surviving the harshest of conditions. In a way, Vikander's Croft is the most human we have seen the character be and the action sequences may be more realistic than we're used to, but in doing so, the director has taken it a step too far. Vikander is a great actress, but she wasn't the perfect choice to have rebooted Tomb Raider with. She's a little too fragile to play the role of Lara Croft.

The new Croft, unfortunately so, ends up being dull. By going back to the roots, director Roar Uthaug has given Vikander the chance, to firmly establish herself as Lara Croft. Vikander is undoubtedly the star of the show, but that isn't saying much when you end up wanting others to have played the lead role. Her co-stars are never given the chance to truly shine. Wu is not given enough screen time while West is stuck in an overtly sentimental father-daughter relationship. Finally, we have Goggins, a menacing villain who doesn't try to deviate from the norm and ends up being bland.

Should you watch it?

The VFX are too heavy and uneven and video games have much to learn, from comic books, if they are to attract critical acclaim in the future. All the characters are stereotypical, and although Vikander isn't sexually objectified - Jolie was to an extent - there is a sort of superficial and lukewarm vibe to her version of Croft.

In the end, Croft is underdeveloped and there isn't enough suspense for the film to ride on. There are some moments of compassion and light-hearted entertainment but with thin performances throughout the film, you are left wanting a lot more. A more realistic Lara Croft this may be, but on the big screen, this one should be given a miss.

Rating: 2/5