She was substantially less whiny than Luke was. She's pretty much taking care of herself through the movie.

As for a remake, it would have been a stronger film if they had made a remake. The movie suffered from a lack of structure to it. They were trying way too hard to bring everything together into one movie when some of it probably should have been left for another movie.

I remember people making the same kind of bullshit complaints about that last Indiana Jones movie. There were serious issues with it related to the ending, but the series was always a bit silly and unrealistic. The fridge scene wasn't really that much sillier than Indy hanging on the outside of a submarine for a week or more without food and water. And that's assuming that they never went underwater at any point along the way.

4) Commits animal cruelty on several occasions.
5) Responsible for killing now extinct species of animals (dinosaurs).
6) Incompetence as argeologist by destroying digsites.

Whoever said she was an archaeologist?

Lara makes it very clear she is there to raid, not study document and/or preserve.

We really were watching entirely different movies. In the one I watched she was whining all the damn time, and making that silly frowny "I wanted a pony!" face.

Not necessarily, you get bonus points or whatever for finding and collecting treasures in pretty much all the games (well the PS1 games, haven't played the others). She needs for her Mansion's museum (I guess).

Other actors acting bad (or not) does not justify nor excuse her obiously bad acting.

so her director asked her to act bad and she acted the bad acting. That's precious ;)

Honestly, you have an opinion, but your entire string of posts read like bad trolling. You're begging the question here and when it comes down to it her acting was one of the smaller things to pick at. The big thing was how they tried to shoehorn in too much into one movie and wound up with a narrative that was lacking in integrity.

You don't like her and that's fine, you're entitled to your opinion, but this really looks like you were looking for a completely different movie. She played the part just fine, it just looks like either you didn't like the movie that was written or you just didn't get any of what was going on.
Or more likely I wasn't looking for reasons to hate the movie. People bitched a lot about Indiana Jones' last movie for similar minutia. Between the CGI effects and the refrigerator scene, people invested an awful lot of energy in hating that movie rather than appreciating it for what it was.

Her acting good or bad was far less of an issue for the movie than the hodgepodge of a plot wherein they tried to shoehorn in all sorts of back stories and set ups into the same film. I was grateful that they didn't shoehorn Luke into the whole movie as that would have definitely broken it.

Neither was I. I simply saw what was there. I don't go looking for reasons to hate a movie. I much prefer to like the movies I watch. Even if I expect bad things, I always keep an open mind. I very much like being pleasently surprised. I just don't try to fool myself into liking poor movies.

I wouldn't call the lead actress doing a poor job and her character being bland and boring "minutia". Also, I actually liked the last Indiana movie.

It seems to me that the issue here is that you don't understand what her character is and why it's in the movie at all. She's not really intended to be much of a lead here. She's basically playing a cross between Princess Leia and badass Leia. Somebody to help develop Fin's character as he goes from Stormtrooper to hero of the resistance.

And compared with the loud and obnoxious women that have become so common in movies, her subtlety is a breathe of fresh air. The fact that she conveys the indignation with a look rather than giving a 20 minute monologue about how men are sexist pigs is something that other actresses could learn from.

Anyways, the movie had serious problems, but her performance is definitely not one of those problems. She played the role correctly and the role was important. My guess is that in the next movie they'll build on that the way they built upon Luke, Leia and Han's weird love triangle.

this is not an awful casting. she has the spunkiness and also the english refinementness to pull off this character. I could totally see her doing this character after doing rey.

Agreed. Not only that, but she is young and potentially has a bit of the same flair that the younger Lara Croft in the reboot has as well. I think she'd be a great mix for portraying the Tomb Raider (2013) Lara for sure.

I think the relevant question is who else was available. Strong female characters in movies tend to be poorly done in recent years. Most of the time they wind up as a trope basically just causing trouble that the protagonist has to fix.

It's grown rather tiresome seeing "strong women" just in movies to appeal to feminists and to cause trouble that the protagonists have to solve or fix.

Ok. I'll just go back to that "we watched two different movies" explanation and end it there. It's pointless to go on. I see a dog, you see a cat, and that's that.

Probably, but it would probably do you some good to watch the movie as it was intended as it sounds like a much better version.

People forget that the original trilogy was finished 30 years ago, or thereabouts. And we don't get the experience of watching Episode IV and then seeing as things unfold. I'm sure that people would have been saying the same sorts of things about that movie if not for the special effects.

This is the first movie since the disastrous prequel trilogy and they set up a lot of stuff with the movie that we aren't privy to. I expect that when the next couple movies come out that people will re-evaluate the job she did in that first movie.