In my experience, people usually hail the re-imagined Lara Croft since TR2013 as an empowered and more ‘respectable’ (for lack of a better word) iconic character that is less visually exclusionary. Sometimes some people even go as far as to say that Lara Croft is finally a decent character that marks the point where the series finally became acceptable. You have many instances of this, such as 1, 2, 3 . Some of this discussion was already covered in this thread from last year
From a purely visual perspective, I completely agree that the re-imaginary was a much better and much more believable design that actually seemed realistic to various degrees. Before this visual reboot, it was pretty evident that Eidos back in the day took the character of Lara Croft and used her as a means to market the games with cheap titillation in order to appeal to straight boys / men with disposable income. (Sidenote: the character was originally supposed to be South-American, but Eidos decided against it and made her a White Brit instead). Yet, as evidenced in many different testimonies by girls and women (such as this research article, or Latoya Peterson & her documentary series on Girl Gamers), Lara Croft was an important character to them in their childhood despite of the obvious sexual objectification in marketing (this is not me condoning the sexual objectification, just nuancing how players use games to their own end).
However, in terms of characterization I think the rebooted Lara Croft / Tomb Raider pales in comparison to the classic, but less-visually inclusive design of the earlier Tomb Raider. I kinda feel like this point is something that flies under the radar when people talk about the reboot of the new Lara Croft, especially when the games are construed as empowering and "feminist".
Grandwizard summarized the point pretty well:
That is to say there’s nothing wrong with being weak or vulnerable. It's entirely okay and fine to have weak and vulnerable characters in entertainment media. I just feel like it’s much more common when it comes to female characters and taking an iconic, empowered "badass" characterization and turn it into this trope is somewhat disappointing (especially when media outlets hail it as "progressive and feminist").
This video highlights how eye-rolling this can be.
Sidenote: Not sure if the thread title is worded properly. What I wanted to get at that is that the new Lara Croft is not really that 'progressive' as some media institutions claim to be and that the reboot characterization is more insidious in how it portrays a previously strong-willed iconic female character as a vulnerable girl in need of protection and help. So it's not necessarily a "setback" for female representation overall in video games, but it is a setback in regards to an iconic character within a medium otherwise devoid of female protagonists who are treated as equals to their male peers.
From a purely visual perspective, I completely agree that the re-imaginary was a much better and much more believable design that actually seemed realistic to various degrees. Before this visual reboot, it was pretty evident that Eidos back in the day took the character of Lara Croft and used her as a means to market the games with cheap titillation in order to appeal to straight boys / men with disposable income. (Sidenote: the character was originally supposed to be South-American, but Eidos decided against it and made her a White Brit instead). Yet, as evidenced in many different testimonies by girls and women (such as this research article, or Latoya Peterson & her documentary series on Girl Gamers), Lara Croft was an important character to them in their childhood despite of the obvious sexual objectification in marketing (this is not me condoning the sexual objectification, just nuancing how players use games to their own end).
However, in terms of characterization I think the rebooted Lara Croft / Tomb Raider pales in comparison to the classic, but less-visually inclusive design of the earlier Tomb Raider. I kinda feel like this point is something that flies under the radar when people talk about the reboot of the new Lara Croft, especially when the games are construed as empowering and "feminist".
- The first game was her origin story in which she had to overcome the struggles of survival to become the Tomb Raider. For this she cried and moaned consistently with several gasps and displays of exhaustion. This point seems acceptable, since it's supposed to be a Coming of Age / Origin story, so I'm all for giving some leeway to Crystal Dynamics
- Yet the weakness evident in TR2013 was accompanied by the off-putting remark by the developers of trying to say that (male) players would want to protect her, and the fact that 3 different male characters had to save her throughout the narrative.
- Then, when Rise of the Tomb Raider came around, I expected strong-willed (murderous) Lara would be much more prominent and prevalent - her Origin story had ended, so it was time for a more adult and hard-eyed protagonist. Yet what I experienced in ROTR was constant moaning, exhaustion, gasps, and display of vulnerability. I thought the whole Coming of Age thing was over, yet the character of Lara Croft continued to display the same vulnerable characteristics from the first game. The voice director, the animation director, the script writer, and the actor seem to simply repeat the same character without realizing the consequences of the prior character development.
Grandwizard summarized the point pretty well:
Just like the original design was sexed up to match the gaming audience, the new design of weak crying constantly vulnerable Lara was too. It's the new hot trend of male power fantasies in gaming to be the strong man leading the vulnerable female through danger like in Bioshock Infinite or The Last of Us. Crystal Dynamics just chased that trend except put the player not in the role of Lara, but in an outside entity that leads her by the hand and would 'want to protect her'. It's still gross just in a different way.
Personally I always prefer badass, capable and adventurous Lara who didn't need an origin story of almost being raped and traumatized to explain away her badassness. She was just awesome because she was.
Also Rihanna Prachett has a bad track record in games. TR2013's cast was a who's who of racial stereotypes and shouldn't be put on any pedestal for good representation and diversity in games. Lara has three different men die to save her in that game. THREE.
That is to say there’s nothing wrong with being weak or vulnerable. It's entirely okay and fine to have weak and vulnerable characters in entertainment media. I just feel like it’s much more common when it comes to female characters and taking an iconic, empowered "badass" characterization and turn it into this trope is somewhat disappointing (especially when media outlets hail it as "progressive and feminist").
This video highlights how eye-rolling this can be.
Sidenote: Not sure if the thread title is worded properly. What I wanted to get at that is that the new Lara Croft is not really that 'progressive' as some media institutions claim to be and that the reboot characterization is more insidious in how it portrays a previously strong-willed iconic female character as a vulnerable girl in need of protection and help. So it's not necessarily a "setback" for female representation overall in video games, but it is a setback in regards to an iconic character within a medium otherwise devoid of female protagonists who are treated as equals to their male peers.