IMDb RATING
5.5/10
150K
YOUR RATING
Lara Croft sets out on a quest to prevent Pandora's box from landing into the wrong hands.Lara Croft sets out on a quest to prevent Pandora's box from landing into the wrong hands.Lara Croft sets out on a quest to prevent Pandora's box from landing into the wrong hands.
- Director
- Writers
- Stars
- Awards
- 1 win & 3 nominations total
Chris Barrie
- Hillary
- (as Christopher Barrie)
Fabiano Altamura
- Jimmy Petraki
- (as Fabiano Martell)
Jonny Coyne
- Gus Petraki
- (as Jonathan Coyne)
Raymond Ofula
- Village Leader
- (as Raymond Offula)
- Director
- Writers
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
5.5150.3K
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Featured reviews
Almost a superior sequel
Lara Croft Tomb Raider: The Cradle of Life is a sequel that might be better than the original. It improves upon the strengths but doubles down on some of the issues as well (bland villain, nonsense plot) which is the only thing stopping it from truly claiming that title. Still, it's another fun globetrotting action movie with an unexpectedly bold swing at the end.
Angelina Jolie is still flawless as Lara Croft. Her confidence, elegance and screen presence remain intact and she really shows how Lara genuinely enjoys her adventures, until they go wrong. Gerard Butler is a superior love interest compared to his predecessor, mostly because his dynamic with Jolie gets more focus and he gets to use his real accent.
Jan de Bont directs a better looking sequel, despite the bad day for night scenes. The action is better here with less distracting CGI and a standout practical wingsuit sequence worthy of Tom Cruise. Alan Silvestri's score almost entirely eschews the club anthems of its predecessor for a more generically rousing blockbuster score with a sense of adventure.
Angelina Jolie is still flawless as Lara Croft. Her confidence, elegance and screen presence remain intact and she really shows how Lara genuinely enjoys her adventures, until they go wrong. Gerard Butler is a superior love interest compared to his predecessor, mostly because his dynamic with Jolie gets more focus and he gets to use his real accent.
Jan de Bont directs a better looking sequel, despite the bad day for night scenes. The action is better here with less distracting CGI and a standout practical wingsuit sequence worthy of Tom Cruise. Alan Silvestri's score almost entirely eschews the club anthems of its predecessor for a more generically rousing blockbuster score with a sense of adventure.
Why do so many people hate this movie?
Although Cradle of Life won't go down in movie history as an all-time classic, I am mystified at why so many critics and moviegoers hated it.
In my opinion, this movie is much better than the first Tomb Raider film. The first film was entertaining, make no mistake, but it still had too much of a comic book feel and 'Angelina Jolie' (qv) had not yet gotten a firm grasp of the Lara Croft role. In Cradle of Life, both Lara and Jolie show newfound maturation, and this makes her (both actress and fictional character) much more interesting to watch. Heck, even Jolie's faux British accent is more convincing the second time around. I was one of the many who protested when she was cast in the role; the first film left be unconvinced, but she finally won me over in her second outing.
The story is also more interesting in the second film, with the whole Pandora's Box angle being something more worthy of Tomb Raider than the tired old "conspiracy out to take over the world" plot of the first film.
There are some aspects of the second film that I didn't care for as much. Lara, for one thing, is far more deadlier this second time around and at one point seriously considers gunning down a man in cold blood. This type of behavior is more fitting for James Bond than Lady Lara Croft. But once I got used to the idea of Lara Croft 007, I didn't mind it so much. (Indeed, if Hollywood ever follows through with it's long-threatened female Bond film, they could do far worse than get Angelina Jolie for the role of Jane(?) Bond.)
What appealed to me in Cradle of Life is how familiar Lara, her background, and her supporting characters have become with only one previous film under their belts. No time is spent explaining who she is and why she lives in such a huge mansion (which sadly appears only briefly). This level of familiarity, of character comfort, is something I've only ever seen once before -- in the Bond series.
Cradle of Life also features some most impressive set pieces that may not necessarily advance the story, but are great to watch, such as a zoom in from outer space on Lara riding a motorcycle, an incredible zoom-in shot THROUGH the window of Croft Manor, and a great scene of Lara shooting at targets while riding a horse -- sidesaddle!
Sadly, the critical and box office failure of Cradle of Life probably guarantees no further entries in the series, and even if it does continue, Jolie looks ready to follow Audrey Hepburn's lead and put acting on the back burner in favor of humanitarian work so the role will probably go to another (possibly less talented) actress. If this turns out to be the case, I believe the Lara Croft series looks set to be remembered as fondly as the Derek Flint films of the 1960s.
Anyone who has been scared away by the bad reviews could do worse than to rent a copy from their local video store and check it out. You might be surprised at how much fun the movie is.
In my opinion, this movie is much better than the first Tomb Raider film. The first film was entertaining, make no mistake, but it still had too much of a comic book feel and 'Angelina Jolie' (qv) had not yet gotten a firm grasp of the Lara Croft role. In Cradle of Life, both Lara and Jolie show newfound maturation, and this makes her (both actress and fictional character) much more interesting to watch. Heck, even Jolie's faux British accent is more convincing the second time around. I was one of the many who protested when she was cast in the role; the first film left be unconvinced, but she finally won me over in her second outing.
The story is also more interesting in the second film, with the whole Pandora's Box angle being something more worthy of Tomb Raider than the tired old "conspiracy out to take over the world" plot of the first film.
There are some aspects of the second film that I didn't care for as much. Lara, for one thing, is far more deadlier this second time around and at one point seriously considers gunning down a man in cold blood. This type of behavior is more fitting for James Bond than Lady Lara Croft. But once I got used to the idea of Lara Croft 007, I didn't mind it so much. (Indeed, if Hollywood ever follows through with it's long-threatened female Bond film, they could do far worse than get Angelina Jolie for the role of Jane(?) Bond.)
What appealed to me in Cradle of Life is how familiar Lara, her background, and her supporting characters have become with only one previous film under their belts. No time is spent explaining who she is and why she lives in such a huge mansion (which sadly appears only briefly). This level of familiarity, of character comfort, is something I've only ever seen once before -- in the Bond series.
Cradle of Life also features some most impressive set pieces that may not necessarily advance the story, but are great to watch, such as a zoom in from outer space on Lara riding a motorcycle, an incredible zoom-in shot THROUGH the window of Croft Manor, and a great scene of Lara shooting at targets while riding a horse -- sidesaddle!
Sadly, the critical and box office failure of Cradle of Life probably guarantees no further entries in the series, and even if it does continue, Jolie looks ready to follow Audrey Hepburn's lead and put acting on the back burner in favor of humanitarian work so the role will probably go to another (possibly less talented) actress. If this turns out to be the case, I believe the Lara Croft series looks set to be remembered as fondly as the Derek Flint films of the 1960s.
Anyone who has been scared away by the bad reviews could do worse than to rent a copy from their local video store and check it out. You might be surprised at how much fun the movie is.
I enjoyed it for what it was, but not as good as the first.
This movie was all right, kept me entertained for the most part, but it needed more and less. The story is a bit better this time in parts, but it is also worse in others. I was kind of hoping I would hate this movie as most critics and people seem to, but I enjoyed it so now I suppose I will get private messages from people saying I should hate the movie. Well don't bother writing me please. The movie starts out with a cool underwater temple scene, and this is the highlight of the movie. It is also the only part in the movie that feels like the tomb raider video game. The rest of the movie has some good stuff, but it doesn't feel like tomb raider, more like a spy movie or something. At one point there is a scene with monsters that look like they belong in the Lord of the Ring movies. For what it was worth it was ok, but these monsters were kind of out of place. At least the stone warriors from the first movie have actually appeared in the game. I would also love to see Lara go into an actual tomb for once. Sure the underwater temple was cool, but it was just one room. Like the first one all the tombs here are usually one room. Can't they have here go through a really long tomb with multiple traps and stuff for her to shoot at? Also, I wish she would have used her guns more. I shoot more in five minutes of the video game than she does in this entire movie, and she always loses her weapons too. Not that I don't want to see character development and stuff, but this is a movie based on a game, it should be a bit more action packed than what we get. All in all though it was okay, I enjoyed it, but it just wasn't as good as the first for me.
better than the first...but..
An entertaining movie, but some stuff should have been redone or just cut out to keep the pace of the movie going I was prepared to walk out of the theatre when she punched the shark, honestly...that isn't even video game material. While like the first one, the plot is a bit thin and kind of milked out to keep it going...as most people would have guessed, the main area of interest lies within Angelina Jolie herself, she is much sexier in this film than the last.
This film is nothing special, I'd say more matured than the first one, but it's fun to watch while kickin back and eating pizza or something.
3 out of 5 stars
This film is nothing special, I'd say more matured than the first one, but it's fun to watch while kickin back and eating pizza or something.
3 out of 5 stars
Craptacular
Craptacular is the one and only word to describe this piece of trash movie. I never knew I could hate a film so much, until I saw Lara Croft Tomb Raider: The Cradle of Life.
After the medicore, but entertaining first Lara Croft movie, comes this just-plain-crap and boring sequel. Half the time during this movie, I found myself staring away from the screen, wondering about other things - it was just totally uninteresting.
A plot you ask? Well, a plot is very non-existant here, save for a recycled story from the first movie. Lara Croft must find the much desired Pandora's Box, along the way teaming up with her old friend, Terry (an incredibly bland Gerard Butler). Sound familiar? It should - we've seen it before.
Bad action scenes, trashy dialogue and enormous plot holes make up 117 minutes of this movie. Was it really that long? It seemed like a lifetime.
Not even the usually fantastic Angelina Jolie can save this film. Avoid at great risk - (* out of ****).
After the medicore, but entertaining first Lara Croft movie, comes this just-plain-crap and boring sequel. Half the time during this movie, I found myself staring away from the screen, wondering about other things - it was just totally uninteresting.
A plot you ask? Well, a plot is very non-existant here, save for a recycled story from the first movie. Lara Croft must find the much desired Pandora's Box, along the way teaming up with her old friend, Terry (an incredibly bland Gerard Butler). Sound familiar? It should - we've seen it before.
Bad action scenes, trashy dialogue and enormous plot holes make up 117 minutes of this movie. Was it really that long? It seemed like a lifetime.
Not even the usually fantastic Angelina Jolie can save this film. Avoid at great risk - (* out of ****).
Did you know
- TriviaIn the scene where Lara Croft and Terry Sheridan jump off a building wearing "flying suits", called wing suits, the stunt was performed by the two men who developed the suits. No CGI, wires, nets, or other special effects were involved. The modern wing suit was invented by Patrick De Gayardon, who died in a parachute accident in April 1998, while testing a new type of parachute in Hawaii.
- GoofsLara's face is forced down onto broken glass by Reiss' henchman Sean causing her to bleed on the table. When she comes up there are no marks, scratches or blood on her face.
- Quotes
Terry Sheridan: I don't suppose either of you know how to fly a helicopter?
Bryce: I can.
Terry Sheridan: What?
Hillary: What...?
Bryce: Yeah. I've got over 150 hours between flight simulation games, models.
Terry Sheridan: And in the real thing?
Bryce: Two.
Terry Sheridan: Two? Well, you're only going to fly it once I'm out, so I hope you remember your two hours well.
- Crazy creditsThe opening logos for Paramount and Mutual Films are projected onto water.
- ConnectionsFeatured in Tomb Raider: The Angel of Darkness (2003)
- SoundtracksDid My Time
Written and Performed by Korn
Produced by Korn and Jonathan Davis
Additional production by Frank Filipetti
Korn performs courtesy of Epic Records
- How long is Lara Croft: Tomb Raider - The Cradle of Life?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Release date
- Countries of origin
- Languages
- Also known as
- Lara Croft - Tomb Raider: La cuna de la vida
- Filming locations
- Santorini, Greece(Opening scene)
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Box office
- Budget
- $95,000,000 (estimated)
- Gross US & Canada
- $65,660,196
- Opening weekend US & Canada
- $21,783,641
- Jul 27, 2003
- Gross worldwide
- $160,099,222
- Runtime
- 1h 57m(117 min)
- Color
- Sound mix
- Aspect ratio
- 2.39 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content






