An archaeologist, Alabama Channing, continues her mother's quest to find a mythical relic in an ancient Chinese tomb.
For a movie trying to capitalize on the popularity of a recent Hollywood output, Tomb Raider, it can pride itself in having a way more decent-looking profession listed on the lead character's CV, having Gina Vittori playing as Ally, a uni professor as opposed to Alicia Vikander's Lara Croft being a bike courier. But the ethics surrounding the activities of an artifact poacher is topic for a more enlightened film to tackle and thus prevents this one from being such a progressive female role model for girls. And to add to that, being an action flick with a female lead character written and directed by men, don't be surprised with the male-gaze, of the PG-kind.
And, yes, what is a kick-ass chick flick without a male co-star, the sort that's not necessarily a love interest, just an eye-candy for the girls to swoon over. Nathan (Andrew Katers), who is kind of a stand-in for Milo Ventimiglia during his stint as Jess Mariano in the Gilmore Girls if you have managed to down two shots of vodka, that is, and sort of on the sleazy side, the character, that is. He's the drop-dead-gorg guy that's not necessarily action movie material, because to be fair, the script doesn't really call for one that sort that's in the tradition of let's say, pre-Bond stardom Daniel Craig or pre-300 Gerhard Butler in Angelina Jolie's Tom Radier. He actually looks like James Franco to me (with my beer goggles on). That, of course, I don't mean as an insult. The guy is just so cuuuuuuuuuute.
Decent performances from the actors, each and every one of them. The script is not that exciting or humorous but adequate enough to get you through to the end. The same goes for the action sequences, the big-bad creature that Ally gets to fight in the final action sequence who is just as big as Daniel Craig. The film sets, just like everything else, all are keeping with the rep that Asylum films have already established.
So, this film is kind of okay for me, and I can honestly say that because where I came from, I have seen way worse entertainment output, crapola captured on celluloid (using not-so-cheap film stock, mind you) that people have passed off as a freaking blockbuster. That's why for a guy like me it's easy for me to forgive this movie's shortcomings (and I don't call it that, more of B-movie aesthetic). So this movie, I consider, is not on the bottom tier of global cinema. It's only when people start to compare this one to the likes of a finely-crafted Hollywood blockbuster would these movies start to suck big time. A sneer-fest, that would be. So turning that comparison switch off and enjoying it the way it is intended to be, chillax time at home, PG-rated, no swearing, nothing risque, wholesome. If kids were accidentally left to watch this unattended, not much to worry about. Just like a butter knife left lying around the house, a blunt knife that a kid can properly use without much supervision. The hazard only comes once a kid starts to use that blunt object to poke their own eyes or somebody else's, then that when things start to get hairy, blah-blah-blah... (digressing now) so...
...my rating: C-minus.
