Tomb Raider/Lara Croft Tomb Raider: The Cradle of Life
Format: Live Action
2001, 2003

WHY IT SUCKED:
I personally wanted a Tomb Raider movie that was an honest to goodness new wave adventure thriller with a woman who showed she was nothing like Indiana Jones in spite of the influences. Instead with “Tomb Raider” we were given a very cheap knock off of Indiana Jones with the style of a music video while “The Cradle of Life” was a cheap knock off of a James Bond Flick except… very, very boring! Hell, not even the manly manliness of Gerard Butler and his Scottish accent could help liven the tedious and utterly boring affair that was “The Cradle of Life.” Angelina Jolie just couldn’t seem to understand what made Lara Croft such an individual as well, thus Croft ended up just being a glamorized version of Jolie.

As for the much hyped “Tomb Raider,” the finished product is a huge disappointment opting, once again, for a comedic hint among all the proceedings on screen. Croft is given a comic relief sidekick, and even when she’s hanging from her ceiling shooting bad guys, you can’t help shake the feeling that director Simon West just isn’t taking this seriously; it’s hard to believe too, since he’s one of the forces behind the brilliant “Keen Eddie.” Take the finale in the tombs where Lara confronts those shambling statues, or when Lara is riding her dog sled without a sled, or the goofy cameo by dad Jon Voight. “The Cradle of Life” seemed to want to bore the audience in to a coma so as not to let on on how really awful it was, and surely enough, not even sending Croft globe trotting could make a sequel worth sitting through.

REBOOT?
Most definitely. With a better grasp on individuality and why the game was so beloved, as well as casting an actually British actress who has the bod and the skills, then I think the movie has definite reboot quality only if the studio realizes that the game was so epic because it was its own monster, not a lame “Indiana Jones” wannabe. The “Tomb Raider” series is filled with so much material to make Lara Croft a banner screen heroine.

House of the Dead
Format: Live Action
2003

WHY IT SUCKED:
Don’t ask me why, but when the trailer for “House of the Dead” first popped up on televisions around the US for a short time, we loved the way it looked. From the Bullet time scenes to the… other bullet time scenes, we dug the way it looked. Then we went to theaters to see it, seeking it out at the AMC here in Manhattan and boy, we were stunned at how awful it was. Not only was it an awful video game movie, but it was an awful movie, period. That was my first introduction to Uwe Boll, and my what a way to greet this here movie geek. Playing the original “House of the Dead” at my local theater, it wasn’t my bag, but it was awfully funny to sit through beat the zombies while wading through the paper thin story.

Boll on the other hand never featured a house in “House of the Dead,” brought together a large cast of really bad actors, while good actors like Clint Howard and Jurgen Prochnow were just given some of the worst material with no hope of ever salvaging these roles. Aside from the truly bad direction, there’s also Boll’s idea of humor that never pans out the way we think. Prochnow’s character is actually named Captain Kirk. No seriously. Howard wears an over sized yellow slicker the whole time on film. One character gets burned on his face and spends more time literally crying about his disfigured face than he does the walking dead outside their doors. You can’t make this stuff up and this was only the beginning of the terror train that is Uwe Boll, Hollywood’s Clown prince.

REBOOT?
Let sleeping corpses lie.

Resident Evil
Format: Live Action
2003

WHY IT SUCKED:
I’m pretty surprised that with the release of the movie there wasn’t a game adapted from the film to fit the mythos set by WS Anderson, because it’s been done with the likes of “Street Fighter.” But then, the “Resident Evil” games were never this stupid before. Though history has revised itself a bit, the reviews for the entire “Resident Evil” movie franchise has been considerably mixed but to me the “Resident Evil” movies are of varying quality. “Resident Evil” is sucky, “Apocalypse” is garbage, and “Extinction” is crap. Hey, I said varying quality, but extremely varying quality.

The trilogy as a whole has been nothing but a pastiche of scenes from different better horror films like “Aliens,” and Anderson has made a habit and ritual of stealing from Romero by blatantly copping scenes from “Day of the Dead” and “Dawn of the Dead.” All the while he insists on a hard R, but most of the violence is blurred, off screen, or left in the dark for us to imagine. “Land of the Dead” was frowned upon for leaving most of the gore in the shadows, and the “Resident Evil” movies are never any different. Then there’s Milla Jovovich who simply refuses to go beyond her shtick as the bastard child of Ellen Ripley and the Terminator while there’s never actually a Residence in the Resident Evil movies. I could go on and on but we have reviews on the site for “Apocalypse” and “Extinction” to fill you in.

REBOOT?
George Romero wrote a script that was pretty damn good. Sure, Chris was a Native American, but that was one of the few deviations from the source material and in the end I’d rather have a 90 percent faithful adaptation from George A. Romero, than a 40 percent faithful adaptation from Paul WS Anderson. I think there’s still potential in Romero’s script. I wouldn’t be surprised if ten years from now, we get a reboot. I can hope.

Doom
Format: Live Action
2005

WHY IT SUCKED:
This should have been a piece of cake. A guy is alone on Mars with a planet of demons and zombies due to hell’s portal opening up and killing his comrades. But that’s not what we got. Instead we were given a very boring, very dumb, and utterly sucky piece of MTV horror dribble that took its sweet time presenting forward motion in terms of plot and characterization. Instead “Doom” felt like a cheap retread of the “Resident Evil” movies with a plot involving scientists and monsters and walking stereotypes by the tune of “Aliens” walking in dark danky tunnels of water to confront a monster covered in darkness lacking any and all effect.

The only time we actually get the feeling that this is a “Doom” movie is when Karl Urban’s character awakens from consciousness and through a first person perspective walks through tunnels and halls firing at monsters and zombies jumping from all corners. Beyond that and the appearance of the BFG, “Doom” is a really tedious little quasi-horror film based around popularity of Dwayne Johnson who couldn’t save this lackluster effort if he tried.

REBOOT?
I think a reboot has definite possibilities. Stick it to the actual plot, give us a more obscure cast and you just may have a great horror actioner here.