seriousfic: (Secret of the Kells)
[personal profile] seriousfic
I'm of two minds on the recent Tomb Raider reboot. On the one hand, I found it an enjoyable game in its own right. On the other hand, it was presented as a Tomb Raider origin story and I can't help but think it fails on that count.

I guess the thing itself is that the game's thesis is throwing the previous games under the bus as, pretty much, sexist tripe and now, finally, they're doing Lara Croft as a strong, independent woman who don't need no man. And I'm no scholar and I'm not a Tomb Raider mega-fan, but I did play a few of the old games and I don't think they're the most problematic things in the world. I know, I know, Lara Croft in a wetsuit or a tanktop and shorts, but is that so out of line? I know Tomb Raider: Underworld gave players the option to choose Lara Croft's costume, so she could be in the iconic outfit or in long pants and a jacket. So is Tomb Raider suddenly feminist, just because they removed the option of shorts altogether?
jungle_heavy

I think that's a bit of a gray area of game design social justice. I know there's been some resentment of Batman games where Catwoman has her costume unzipped, and it does get pretty ridiculous. However, what if the default option was for her to be zipped up to the neck, Brubaker style, and the game gave you the option to show some cleav, the way some fighting games have alternate costumes for the characters? Would it be sexist just having the option?

Anyway, the new Tomb Raider goes to almost ridiculous lengths in the opposite direction. "So, won't take Lara seriously because she's hot, huh? Well what if we just COVER HER IN SHIT FOR THE ENTIRE GAME!" No, seriously, pretty much the entire game. Which sorta short-circuits the whole "hero's journey" thing since she starts out the game beat to shit and pretty much just gets beat to shit in other ways. Imagine if John McClane had started Die Hard with his feet cut up and his wifebeater covered in blood. Honestly, I'd be more impressed if Lara had taken a jacket off a dead nogoodnik before she climbed one of the snow-capped mountains instead of staying in her grimy tanktop throughout. Maybe all the blood and shit on it provides insulation.

Speaking of nogoodniks, I can't help but be unimpressed. The game's villains are a cult of strange, woman-hating assholes, but they come across as the same Eastern European terrorist mercenaries you'd find in any other game, chatting about who stole whose lasagna out of the fridge and whatnot. They're a strange, woman-hating cult! Can't they talk about something more interesting, dare I say creepy? The extent of their religion seems to be having candles everywhere, so I have no way to prove they're not worshipping a love scene in a Cinemax movie. And the Big Bad has the most obnoxious voice actor. When he first shows up, he does everything but yell at Starscream to identify himself as absolutely being the villain. Alright, I get it, yous evil. Tone it down a notch. I would've been more impressed if he actually conducted himself like someone who truly believed his shit, like a youth pastor for Darken Rahl, instead of having an Evil League of Evil union card.

As I was saying, I don't buy this as an origin for the Lara Croft we know and are aware of. I suppose that's nothing new; could you see Casino Royale leading to anything Roger Moore does? But there's a certain commonality to all the Bonds. This Lara Croft doesn't feel at all Croftian; she feels like generic Nolanism. I played a few of the games and I watched the movies, and Lara always came off as a thrill-seeking adventurer who raided tombs for fun and excitement. I don't see anything particularly wrong with that characterization; why can't a heroine be cool and sassy without having standard-issue secret pain and survivor's guilt and parental issues?

I suppose the answer is that explaining how Lara, however she started off, could go from that to a cool, nigh-invincible tomb raider was too hard. It's far easier to turn her into Ripley, even if it doesn't fit the character. After Batman Begins, I could kinda see Christian Bale as Michael Keaton's Batman, in a rough sort of way. But I couldn't ever see this Lara going on another "adventure." She'd be like the final girl after a slasher movie; popping pills and having nightmares and possibly cutting herself.

Really, the problem goes all the way to the logline of the project. "A survivor is born." Would "survivor" be anyone's first choice to describe Lara Croft? Adventuress, maybe, thrill-seeker, daredevil, etc etc. Survivor—every action hero is a survivor! John McClane is a survivor, but we don't watch his movies because he happens to be really good at not dying from being shot, stabbed, and blown up. Making Croft's defining characteristic "she doesn't die" is like Casino Royale's tagline being "A wine snob is born."

Now, there are some good moments where you can believe that Lara is transitioning into a badass and not just someone with a high tolerance for horrible things happening to her. After she gets a machine gun, she basically runs around yelling for everyone to LICK IT UP BABY. But those are few and far between, which is weird, because it seems like they're the entire point of the exercise.

Also, the QTEs pissed me off. Sorry I didn't hit the arbitrary button in a half-second, I'll just watch Lara Croft get strangled again, that's fine.

Profile

seriousfic: (Default)
seriousfic

April 2017

S M T W T F S
      1
23 45678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
30      

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jun. 17th, 2025 11:59 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios