6 / 10
Lara Croft: Tomb Raider is the film that turned Angelina Jolie into a global action star and one of the more commercially successful video game adaptations of the early 2000s. Simon West directed. Patrick Massett and John Zinman wrote. Jolie plays Lara Croft, the British aristocrat archaeologist who has been the protagonist of Eidos Interactive’s Tomb Raider game series since 1996. Iain Glen plays Manfred Powell, the Illuminati operative trying to assemble an ancient artifact called the Triangle of Light. Daniel Craig plays Alex West, a rival tomb raider and Croft’s former lover. Jon Voight plays Lord Richard Croft, Lara’s father, who disappeared on an archaeological expedition years before. The plot involves a planetary alignment, an artifact split into two pieces, and the standard video-game-movie progression of action set pieces in elaborate locations.
The film made approximately two hundred and seventy-five million dollars worldwide on a one hundred and fifteen million dollar budget. It was a commercial success that established Jolie as one of the most marketable action leads of her generation. The 2003 sequel Lara Croft Tomb Raider: The Cradle of Life is significantly weaker. The 2018 reboot starring Alicia Vikander is a different matter discussed in the Woke Disasters category. The 2001 film is the canonical Lara Croft on screen.
Angelina Jolie
Jolie was twenty-five during filming. She had won the Best Supporting Actress Oscar two years earlier for Girl, Interrupted (1999) and was transitioning into mainstream stardom. The role required her to be physically credible as a tomb raider, charismatic enough to carry an action film alone, and committed enough to British aristocratic Lara Croft to make the character recognizable as the video game protagonist. She delivered all three. The performance is the film’s foundation.
Jolie’s specific physical presence is the film’s main selling point. The script gives her standard video-game-movie material. Jolie elevates the material by committing to the work without apology. The physical training. The accent. The specific posture of a wealthy British woman who handles firearms professionally. None of this would have worked without absolute commitment from the lead. Jolie’s commitment is the reason the film is watchable. The Cradle of Life sequel demonstrates what the same script looks like without Jolie at peak engagement.
For Writers
A performer at the right point in their career can elevate weak material in ways the script alone cannot produce. Angelina Jolie’s specific charisma in 2001 made Tomb Raider work despite a forgettable script. The lesson is that timing matters in casting. The right performer at the right career moment will commit in ways established stars or unknown newcomers cannot. Look for performers who are hungry but established. The combination produces work that the same performer five years later might not deliver.
The Video Game Adaptation Problem
Video game adaptations have historically struggled because games are participatory and films are not. Tomb Raider 2001 partially solved this by treating the games’ iconic visual elements (the dual pistols, the British manor, the elaborate tombs, the puzzle-solving exploration) as production design choices rather than as plot elements. The film preserved what the audience associated with the property visually while writing an original plot rather than adapting any specific game’s narrative.
The approach worked commercially. The audience that knew Lara Croft from the games recognized the character. The audience that did not know the games could follow the plot. The compromise is that the film does not feel like any specific Tomb Raider game. It feels like a Tomb Raider film. The distinction is important. The film is in the franchise’s universe rather than being one of the franchise’s stories.
For Writers
Adapting a participatory medium for a passive one requires the writer to identify which elements transfer and which do not. Tomb Raider 2001 transferred the visual identity and the protagonist without trying to transfer specific game plots. The lesson is that adaptation is a category-of-translation decision rather than a fidelity decision. What kind of work is the source? What kind of work will the adaptation be? The categories rarely overlap completely. Pick what transfers cleanly. Reinvent the rest.
The Set Pieces
The film’s set pieces include the manor invasion in the opening, the Cambodian temple sequence with the stone monkeys, the planetary alignment finale in Russia, and several smaller intermediate sequences. The set pieces are competently staged. They are also generic. Most of them could have been transplanted into any other 2000s action film without significant adjustment. The Cambodia sequence is the most distinctive. The other sequences are interchangeable.
The lack of distinctive set pieces is the film’s central craft weakness. The set pieces work as individual sequences but do not accumulate into a coherent identity. A more distinctive director might have given each location its own visual logic. Simon West is competent rather than distinctive. The film’s success was largely Jolie’s. The set pieces did not contribute as much as they should have given the budget.
For Writers
Action sequences need distinctive identity rather than generic competence to elevate a film. Tomb Raider 2001 has competent set pieces that do not stand out. Better action films distinguish their sequences through specific staging, location, or visual logic. The lesson is that competence is the baseline rather than the achievement. Every action sequence should have something specific that no other film’s action sequence has. If your set pieces could be transplanted into any other film in the genre, they are not doing the work they should be doing.
Craft Note
The Croft Manor opening sequence is the film’s central character-establishment craft. Lara’s training session against the AI combat droid stages Angelina Jolie’s specific physical presence within seven minutes of runtime. The opening demonstrates how franchise launches can establish a lead character’s specific physical vocabulary before the plot arrives to complicate it. The audience knows what Lara can do before Lara is asked to do anything.
The Verdict
6/10. A commercially successful video game adaptation that succeeded primarily on Angelina Jolie’s specific charisma. The set pieces are competent but generic. The script is functional. The Jolie performance is the only essential element. Watch it for that performance and for Daniel Craig’s pre-Bond supporting role. The sequel is best skipped.
FAQ
How is the sequel?
The Cradle of Life (2003) is significantly weaker. Same lead, weaker script, less engaged production.
Is Daniel Craig really in it?
Yes. He plays Alex West, a rival tomb raider and Lara’s former lover. This was four years before he became James Bond. The performance gives the film one of its better dynamics.
How does it compare to the games?
The visual elements transfer well. The specific game plots do not. The film is in the franchise’s universe rather than being one of the franchise’s stories.
Is Jon Voight really her father?
Yes. Voight is Angelina Jolie’s actual father. The casting was a structural in-joke. They had been publicly estranged at the time and the role was partly a reconciliation attempt.
How is the 2018 reboot?
Different. Alicia Vikander’s Lara Croft is the reboot’s version. The reboot makes specific choices that have divided fans. Discussed elsewhere.
Who is Simon West?
British director. Con Air (1997), The General’s Daughter (1999), Tomb Raider (2001), The Mechanic (2011), The Expendables 2 (2012). Specializes in mainstream action.
Should I watch this?
Yes, for the Angelina Jolie performance specifically. The film does not work without her.