This?

Tuesday, June 2, 2009

Going Too Far

Here's a depressing little article from some entertainment site or other:

"ANGELINA JOLIE has been ditched by the producers of the TOMB RAIDER movies after they decided she's now too old for the role.

The Hollywood beauty starred in the first two Tomb Raider films in 2001 and 2003, but movie bosses will replace the 33-year-old with a younger star for the next installment."


There's literally nothing right about the above, starting with the very idea that we've somehow gotten three goddamn Tomb Raider movies. Is that possible? Dear God. I don't even need to point out the depressing idea that at 33, Jolie is considered too over-the-hill to play the character.

But the capper is what the producer had to say:

"We are rebooting Lara Croft. It's a great story that we're going to tell, very character-orientated and more realistic than the past movies. It is an origin tale so it's going to be a younger Lara Croft."

Jiminy Christmas. When even Tomb Raider is getting rebooted, I think that means the 'reboot' craze for franchise properties has officially gone too far. It reminds me of the comedian's routine about a Starbucks opening inside another Starbucks - I thoroughly expect to one day be watching a rebooted film property, and then the film reboots halfway through with an all-new cast.

But the big question: Is there a public clamor for a more realistic, character-based film adapted from a video game whose claim to fame is a lead character with giant breasts? Would there not, in fact, just be a clamor for more footage of said breasts, the less realistic, the better? Also, I hold in suspicion a man who uses the term 'character-orientated,' although I suppose he could just be making a play on the globe-trotting aspects of the franchise.

D.

5 comments:

Karl said...

Oh sure, when I said Hollywood should come up with something original you said they have always "rebooted" series and it was nothing new. Now it seems rebooting Tomb Raider is going too far for you.

I do happen to agree that 33 is way too young to be too old. Also, a series less then ten years old doesn't really need to be taken in a new direction yet.

In conclusion, Hollywood sucks.

bran said...

She's not 33,,

I went to her b-day party when I first moved here.. The Voigts used to live in sneden's landing.. and she's only a couple of years younger than I am, and she looks it.

RC said...

I'll admit that to me, she looks older than 33 - but she's ALWAYS looked older than that, and her IMDB does give her birth date as June, 1975 - meaning that she's (at least officially) almost 34.

Anyhow, I'll go with that unless you have dated photographic evidence. Childhood memories are by far the least reliable thing on Earth.

D.

RC said...

K: It's one thing to reboot a franchise that's 40+ years old when all the original actors are either dead or with one foot in the grave. It's something else when the franchise in question is six years old. But I don't think they're rebooting, despite what wrote - I guess they're 'prequelling.' Guh.

D.

RC said...

Also: does Hollywood suck when they gave us the things they're rebooting in the first place?

D.