So to keep the audience’s attention, the movie has to involve the audience emotionally, or surprise them, or otherwise keep them guessing and engaged. In a movie, though, there’s no direct participation. Players get to make choices and explore worlds and figure out puzzles, but the player is the one doing the work. Movies based on video games are almost uniformly terrible, with very few exceptions, and the reason is sort of obvious: The fun of a video game comes from participating in the story. Tomb Raider sidesteps the problems common to video game movies Lara Croft 2.0 has finally made it to movie screens. And it both parallels and diverges from the rebooted game, taking its cues from what players liked while throwing in just enough surprises to make it interesting to general audiences. The movie isn’t particularly clever or innovative, but as an action film, it’s satisfying. It’s got a story, and characters, and an emotional center, and it’s plotted in a way that sets up sequels. But the 2018 reboot of Tomb Raider, starring Alicia Vikander as Croft, actually wants to be a movie. The old Tomb Raider movies are terrible, patently silly and campy without the saving self-awareness of, say, The Mummy. Two movies, in which Angelina Jolie (in a padded bra) played Croft, came out in 20, and both filmed her body in ways that are beginning to feel dated the first more or less introduces her with a lingering crotch shot. But it also tracks with how audiences and filmmakers have slowly changed their ideas about women in action movies, something that’s paralleled by the Tomb Raider movies. That development certainly mirrors shifting ideas about the place of women in the gaming world - and in games themselves - over the past two decades.
Vox-mark vox-mark vox-mark vox-mark vox-mark
0 kommentar(er)
